OME;^PF^CTlCAI^fllNT^ 

o/  Wood  E^Nqf^viNq 


mmmmmmmmimmmmmmmimmimmimmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm^ 


c 


^'^\h^- 


.   y/,  .^x'a^j^^^ 


r^ 


Platk  II. 


SOME  PRACTICAL  HINTS 


WOOD-ENGRAVING 


FOR    THE    INSTRUCTION   OF    REVIEWERS 
AND  TME  PUBLIC 


BY 


W.    J.    LINTON 


BOSTON 
LEE    AND    SHEPARD,    PUBLISHERS 

NKW  YORK:    CHARLES  T.  DILLINGHAM 
1879 


COPTRIGHT, 
1879, 

Bt  Lee  ajtd  Shepard. 


Elcctrotyped  at  the  Boston  Stereotype  Foundry, 
No.  19  Spring  Lane. 


TO   THE   AUTHOR 

AN    EXPOSITION    OF   THE    FALSE    MEDIUM 

I    DEDICATE    THESE    HINTS,    IN    TOKEN 

OF  ADMIRATION    AS    WELL    AS 

PERSONAL    REGARD. 


ADVERTISEMENT 


THE  object  of  the  following  treatise  is  to  help  the  general 
public  (that  is,  those  who  had  not  the  good  fortune  to  read 
the  Atlantic  Monthly  for  June)  toward  some  accuracy  of  judg- 
ment as  to  what  is  good  and  what  bad  in  Engraving-on-Wood. 
What  is  said  may  also  have  an  interest  and  be  of  advantage  to 
engravers.  The  remarks  interspersed  for  the  special  benefit  of 
Reviewers  whose  ignorance  evaded  the  Atlantic  teaching  will 
not  perhaps  acquire  for  me  their  spontaneous  thanks.  I  have 
been  compelled  however  to  take  the  risk,  said  Reviewers'  blun- 
ders serving  me  as  texts,  themselves  as  convenient  blackboards 
whereupon  my  Hints  might  be  made  more  sufficiently  conspicu- 
ous.    Why  else  should  1  have  troubled  them  ? 

For  tlic  loan  of  Plate  I,  I  am  indebted,  through  the  kindness 
of  Mr.  E.  J.  Whitney,  to  the  American  Tract  Society ;  and  for 
Plate  IV  my  thanks  are  due  to  Messrs.  Putnam. 

New  Haven,  Conn.,  W.    J.     LINTON. 

August,  187  > 


CONTENTS 


My  Reviewers 3 

Noble  Simplicity 14 

FAc-siMiLE 27 

White-Line 4- 

Mechanism  and  Art 54 

Photography  on  Wood 70 

Further  Hints 82 


SOME    PRACTICAL    HINTS 


WOOD-ENGRAVING 


HINTS  ON  WOOD-ENGRAVING. 


MY   REVIEWERS 

FOR  the  last  June  number  of  the  Atlantic  Monthly 
I  wrote  an  article  on  Art  in  Engraving  on  Wood. 
Aware  how  little  technically  was  known  concerning  en- 
graving, I  tried  to  make  my  meaning  plain  "to  the 
meanest  capacity."  I  confess  I  did  not  think  of  the 
Reviewers. 

The  article  attracted  much  notice  :  a  fact  which  I  may 
state  without  any  straining  of  my  modesty,  since  the  re- 
marks of  the  Reviewers  generally  were  the  very  reverse 
of  complimentary.  Wherefore  it  has  become  necessary, 
by  way  of  preface  to  the  present  work,  that  I  should 
endeavor  at  some  reply.  Not  —  though  as  sensitive  as 
most  men  to  the  opinion  of  my  fellows  —  not  that  I  am 
very  sore   from    the   flaying  I  am  supposed    to  have  un- 


4  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

dergone  ;  the  many  stripes,  like  those  of  the  wicked 
step-mother  in  the  fairy  tale,  fell  upon  me  soft  as  feath- 
ers (the  foolish  words  of  a  few  angry  young  men  have 
no  more  weight),  —  but  only  to  establish  some  qualifica- 
tion for  my  daring  to  write  again. 

It  would  seem  that,  my  literary  style  not  being  suffi- 
ciently "  lucid,"  my  Reviewers  generally  missed  my  mean- 
ino- ;  indeed  they  so  comically  contrariwise  construed  my 
words,  furthering  their  misunderstanding  by  misquota- 
tion, that  it  is  due  not  only  to  myself,  but  also  to  a 
book-buying,  bewildered  public,  that  I  should  rescue  my 
character  from  these  critics  before  attempting  to  explain 
my  Atlantic  explanations.  The  impatient  reader  may 
have  heard  what  becomes  of  those  who  allow  themselves 
to  be  led  ditchward  by  tlie  blind. 

According  to  my  Reviewers  I  am  one  of  '•  the  old 
fogies  of  Christendom "  (a  very  ancient  and  respectable 
guild,  for  admission  to  which  I  am  indebted  to  the  kind 
and  potent  influence  of  Dr.  Holland)  ;  a  feeble  and  mo- 
notonous pugilist,  at  the  end  of  my  development;  a 
worn-out,  mechanical  wood-engraver,  whose  blocks  are 
disesteemed  and  declined  by  the  publishers ;  "  discon- 
tented," '-disappointed,"  and  "self-interested;"  "petu- 
lant," "  splenetic,"  "  angry,"  "  spiteful,"  "  bigoted,"  "  ex- 
aggerated," "  exasperated,"  "  vituperative  ;  "  eager  only 
to  pick  holes,  "  like  an  artistic  pickpocket,"  in  the  works 


MY    REVIEWERS  0 

of  better  men  —  especially  rising  young  men  of  whom  I 
am  envious.  I  bring,  according  to  these  gentlemen, 
neither  honesty,  nor  intelligence,  nor  good-humor,  nor 
liberal  regard  for  Art  to  the  platform  from  which  I 
have  the  impudence  to  preach.  In  short,  there  is  noth- 
ing except  fifty  years'  experience  to  justify,  or  rather  to 
excuse,  the  o2:)ening  of  my  malicious  lips  or'  the  scratch- 
ing of  my  envenomed  pen.  Perhaps  the  allov^'ance  of 
that  small  advantage,  of  which  even  critical  acumen  can- 
not deprive  me,  the  one  seed-corn  remaining  out  of  mv 
Reviewers'  chafl-sack,  may  be  accepted  by  a  kindly  pub- 
lic as  some  warrant  for  my  presumption  in  ofiering  so77ie 
practical  hints  on  wood  engraving. 

Why  all  this  hubbub  of  their  unfriendly  voices?  What 
have  I  done?  lam  guiltless  of  intentional  offence.  I 
did  but  to  the  best  of  my  ability,  and  conscientiouslv, 
honestly  and  fairly  criticize  a  st)le  of  work  which,  so  far 
as  my  untaught  judgment  could  or  can  perceive,  is  mere- 
tricious and  mischievous.  I  named,  but  ^vith  "  bated 
breath,"  one  engraver  only,  not  singled  out  liy  myself; 
and  him  I  dealt  with  generously,  sugaring  with  not  stinted 
praise  the  censures  I  was  bound  to  administer,  even  for 
his  own  medicining.  I  avoided  other  name-mentioning, 
confining  my  rebukes  to  the  work,  sparing  the  insignifi- 
cant workmen.  Is  it  treason  to  object  to  the  use  of  a  mul- 
tiple machine  in  what  ought  to  be  a  work  of  intelligent 


6  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

art?  Is  it  scandalous  —  scandahun  i7iagnatum  —  to  name 
somebody's  magazine,  when  it  so  loudly  trumpets  its 
ownership  of  the  New  Style?  Is  criticism  of  contempo- 
rary wood-engraving  the  unforgiven  sin?  What  means 
this  noise  then  in  our  ears?  Is  it  only  because  my 
simple  voice  has  disturbed  that  little  brood  of  imfledged 
roosters  that  nestles  under  the  motherly  wings  at  743 
Broadway?  For  it  is  thence  comes  all  the  cackling. 
Dear  little  gentlemen  !  I  am  indeed  not  the  fearful  hob- 
goblin you  in  your  skurrying  have  imaged.  I  have  not 
the  heart  even  to  wish  harm  to  one  of  you. 

For  myself,  if  I  must  speak  autobiographically,  partly 
for  the  sake  of  my  Reviewers,  whose  generosity  will  cer- 
tainly rejoice  at  my  vindication,  but  chiefly  in  deference 
to  a  much-deluded  Public,  —  since  the  adverse  cackling 
is  not  ojDcnly  announced  as  from  Little  Roosterdom,  but 
comes  out  with  the  indorsement  of  respected  and  experi- 
enced editors  (of  the  Sim,  the  Nation^  &c.)  as  the  quite 
coincident  cackle  of  accepted  wisdom,  —  for  myself,  then, 
speaking  humbly,  I  protest  that  I  am  somewhat  less  offen- 
sive, and  more  trustworthy  withal,  than  Little  Roosterdom 
through  the  respective  journals  reports.  It  is  more  than 
fifty  3'ears  since  I  began  to  handle  a  graver  and  to  learn 
concerning  wood-engraving.  I  cannot  charge  myself 
with  having  during  that  length  of  time  ever  written  or 
spoken   or  thought  enviously  or  uncharitably  of  a  brother 


MY    REVIEWERS  / 

artist.  Jealousy  I  do  not  recognize  as  an  artist's  feeling ; 
and  I  have  faithfully  and  unfalteringly  endeavored  to 
make  myself  and  my  conduct  worthy  of  an  artist's  name, 
however  low  might  be  my  rank  in  Art.  Among  men 
older  than  myself,  who  had  won  repute  while  I  was  yet 
unknown,  I  counted  many  friends :  John  Thompson, 
William  Harvey,  Orrin  Smith  (whose  partner  I  after- 
wards became),  and  others.  I  had  some  opportunities 
among  these  men  of  learning  what  good  work  is,  even 
if  my  master,  G.  W.  Bonner,  —  a  nephew  and  pupil  of 
Branston,  and  a  good  artist,  —  had  not  taught  me.  By 
my  contemporaries,  in  some  sense  of  course  my  rivals, 
1  was  well  and  friendlily  esteemed  :  I  do  not  recollect 
that  I  ever  had  an  enemy  or  a  dispute.  And  younger 
men  in  England,  and  not  a  few  hei-e,  will  speak  of  me 
as  never  withholding  help,  whether  of  advice  or  praise, 
and  as  incapable  of  grieving  at  the  advancement  of  my 
juniors.  What  I  have  been  able  to  do  will  not  be  les- 
sened by  the  greater  achievements  of  others.  Methinks 
it  is  not  only  unconscious  assurance  which  encourages  me 
in  saying  that  I  have  the  right  to  speak,  and  at  least  as 
authoritatively  as  an  art-critic,  of  Art  in  Engraving  on 
Wood ;  and  to  escape  (as  I  shall  with  thoughtful  and 
gentlemanly  opponents),  even  personal  abuse,  counter 
argument  failing,  when  I  speak  with  severity  of  what,  in 
giving  judgment,  I  am  bound  to  condemn. 


0  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

Enough  of  myself.  To  pass  now  to  a  few  of  the 
curious  utterances  which  my  Atlantic  article  provoked. 
One  has  to  clear  away  rubbish  before  building ;  and  after 
consideration  of  some  queer  criticisms,  there  may  be  room 
for  observations  which  an  intelligent  reader,  if  not  a  Re- 
viewer, may  be  able  to  compi'ehcnd. 

First  in  order,  preluding  Scrih7ier^  comes  that  unusual 
authority  in  art  matters,  the  Timcs^  whose  young  man's 
remarkable  remarks  on  "  realism  "  and  "  impressionism," 
high  art  and   photography  on  wood   (not  signed  D.  K.), 

1  reserve  for  notice  in  another  place.  In  the  wake  of 
the  Times  follows  Scribner  for  Jul}'.  I  take  off  my 
shoes  before  I  ascend  those  awful  stairs  to  crawl  beneath 
the  bust  of  Pidlas,  overhanging  the  editorial  portal. 
Scribner  of  course  was  bound  to  go  for  me.  Is  it  D.  K. 
again.''  Surely  not  Dr.  Holland  himself.?  He,  a  good 
man,  the  Washington  of  engraving  independence,  who 
may  throw  his  little  hatchet,  but  cannot  lie,  —  he  could 
not,  even  as  matter  of  private  opinion,  have  written,  nor 
have  allowed  to  stand  had  he  read,  that  "  we  believe  it  is 
pretty  well  understood  among  publishers  that  Mr.  Lin- 
ton's work  is  not  what  it  used  to  be."  You  did  not  be- 
lieve that,  Dr.  Holland!  knowing  that  four  times — I 
think  I  may  say  five  times  —  during  the  last  few  months 
Mr.  Linton  was  asked  to  work  for  Scribner^  and  did  de- 
liver work  so  late  as  within  a  month  of  the  above-quoted 


MY    REVIEWERS  \f 

belief.  But  who  knows?  Work  was  pressed  upon  the 
"  old  man  at  the  end  of  his  development,"  solely  because 
of  past  respect  and  pity  for  his  decline.  And  judging 
from  other  of  the  productions  appearing  in  the  magazine, 
—  allowance  cheerfully  made  for  much  of  excellent 
quality^ — I  may  not  be  the  only  recipient  of  the  Scrib- 
ner  alms. 

Scribner  had,  of  course,  to  review  me  ;  but  did  not  at- 
tempt to  meet  my  arguments.  In  accordance  with  an  old 
disreputable  law  maxim,  "'When  3'ou  have  no  argument, 
abuse  vour  adversary  ! "  personalities  such  as  I  have  sam- 
pled usurped  the  place  of  defence,  even  to  the  unhand- 
some dragging  in  of  the  names  of  persons  who  had  nothing 
whatever  to  do  with  the  questions  at  issue  ;  and  besides 
the  personalities  there  was  the  reiterated  disingenuousness 
of  misquoting.  Some  half  a  dozen  times  the  word  le- 
gitimate is  given  as  mine  —  a  word  I  have  never  used. 
To  borrow  the  Reviewer's  words,  "  it  certainly  has  not  a 
very  pretty  look."  That  phrase  does  strike  one  as  Hol- 
iandish,  after  all.  Perhaps  he  reviewed  the  writing.  It 
is  only  the  Times  article  improved.  One  notice  by-and- 
by  may  serve  for  both. 

J3ut  if  Scribne?'  shirks  the  question,  hiding  behind  its 
deeds  of  charit}',  the  Sun  still  shines  for  all,  and  thence 
we  may  expect  enlightenment.  Nearly  three  columns  of 
the  Sunday  Sun,  more  than  an  ordinary  octavo  pamphlet, 


10  HINTS   ON   WOOD    ENGRAVING 

and  all  for  three  cents,  inform  one  hundred  and  twenty 
thousand  readers  "  concerning  wood-engraving."  The 
paper  has  been  sold  ;  the  editor  and  the  one  hundred  and 
twenty  thousand  readers  sold  also.  Some  little  worthless 
information,  so  much  as  might  be  picked  up  from  an 
engraver's  errand-boy  —  not  always  correctly  reported  — 
is  given  at  the  outset.     Such  as  :  — 

Wood-engraving  is  the  converse  of  steel.  In  inking  the 
steel  plate,  "  the  furrows  and  depressions  receive  the  ink, 
the  surface  remains  clean."  [Which  would  rather  aston- 
ish a  steel-plate  printer.] 

W'ood-engraving  is  done  on  box-wood,  and  the  work  is 
not  healthful.  [Probably  on  account  of  the  fumes  arising 
from  the  decomposed  wood.] 

Engravers  as  a  class  are  among  the  most  industrious 
of  workers. 

And  designers  ditto.  An  industrious  and  clever  one, 
who  is  also  a  writer,  "  can  turn  out  one  article  a  month 
with  ease,  tliereby  making  five  thousand  dollars  a  year ; " 
but  (carefully  salting  the  provision  in  same  paragraph), 
"  as  a  matter  of  fact  turns  out  only  one  in  a  year."  And 
so  does  not  make  five  thousand  dollars  a  year. 

''  To  prepare  a  block  for  a  picture  "  [very  clear  that !] 
"  it  is  whitened  lightly,  —  some  artists  preferring  for  the 
purpose  the  surface  of  white  enamelled  cards."  [And  he 
might  have  added,  for  further  elucidation  of  the  mysteries. 


MY    REVIEWERS  11 

that  they  sometimes  turn  up  their  coat-sleeves  to  prevent 
whitening  the  cuffs.] 

Also  "  some  artists  draw  with  a  mixture  of  black  and 
white — ^iiache  ;"  "but  the  effects  they  secure  are  not 
very  brilliant." 

Others  mix  colors  with  their  Indian  ink. 

"  It  must  be  understood  that  the  drawing  on  the  block 
has  to  be  reversed  —  that  is,  drawn  inversely  as  it  appears 
when  printed."  [So.  The  style  is  worthy  of  the  infor- 
mation.] 

And  so  on  through  more  than  half  the  article  ;  after 
which  the  teacher  quits  the  mere  explanatory  and  j^repar- 
atory  platform,  and  comes  down  to  personal  remarks  and 
"  criticism."     Samples  of  both  may  suffice. 

"  Mr.  Linton's  great  trouble  now  is  that  he  cannot  any 
longer  exploit  his  own  peculiar,  and  often  ignorant,  no- 
tions at  the  expense  of  the  artists,  because  p/ioiog-raphy- 
on-wood  has  ittterfered  with  hi?n,  and  because  when  —  as 
we  have  heard  it  expressed  —  he  '  cuts  the  whole  soul  out 
of  a  drawing,'  it  is  compared  with  the  original,  the  fact 
noted,  and  the  block  declined."  Photography-on-wood  is 
not  the  new  invention  my  Reviewer  seems  to  suppose. 
It  has  been  "interfering"  with  me  for  twenty  years,  dur- 
ing which  period,  and  for  twenty  years  before,  I  have 
never  had  a  block  declined.  When  this  unveracious  sat- 
ellite of  the  Sun  asserted  the  contrary,  he  was  probably 
"  misinformed." 


12  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

We  call  a  man  unveracious  when  he  states  the  opposite 
of  truth.  I  liope  that  is  not  "  vituperation."  What  fitter 
word  may  I  courteously  employ  toward  the  writer  of  the 
following?  — 

"Mr.  Jungling  engraves  the  white  paint  that  Mr.  Kelly 
uses.  .  .  .  Mr.  Linton  gets  extremely  angry  with  him  and 
implies  that  he  uses  a  '  multiple  graver.'  This  remarka- 
ble tool  is  probably  the  oftspring  of  Mr.  Linton's  imagi- 
nation, because  we  can7tot  jind  that  any  engraver  of 
repute  in  Nevj    York  ever  saw  one." 

Mr.  Linton  never  either  named  or  referred  to  Mr.  Jung- 
ling.  The  only  cut  drawn  by  Mr.  Kelly  which  Mr.  Linton 
criticized  (a  second  being  barely  mentioned)  has  Mr. 
Evans'  name  to  it.  Doubtless  the  multiple  graver  — 
which  this  inquiring  Reviewer  dared  not  defend,  and 
which,  therefore,  /le  could  not  fnd  '■'  that  any  engraver 
of  repute  in  New  York  ever  saw"  —  w\as,  at  the  time 
Mr.  Linton  wrote,  in  use  by  the  Reviewer's  friend,  Mr. 
Jungling.  Unveracity  does  not  fit  the  occasion  here. 
Am  I  "spiteful"?  I  knows  but  refrain  from  giving,  this 
Reviewer's  name.  He  has  friends  who  would  be  ashamed 
of  him. 

Of  Mr.  Jungling  he  writes  that  he  engraves  Mr.  Kelly's 
"  white  paint,"  and  really  "conveys  its  quality."  But 
"  the  eflects  are  not  brilliant." 

Concerning  photography,  the  remarks   of  this    teacher 


MY    REVIEWERS  13 

of  "  one  hundred  and  twenty  thousand  readers "  are  of 
equal  value.  That  subject  will  be  treated  further  on. 
Here  it  may  be  enough  to  observe  that  he  has  evidently 
been  misled  by  the  errand-boy.  The  errand-boy  must 
have  known  better. 

Am  I  counting  —  rather  discounting  —  all  the  Sun 
spots.?  Mercy,  no!  It  were  a  labor  of  Hercules.  They 
lie  so  thick  that  the  sunlight  on  this  occasion  is  but 
•'  darkness  made  visible."  It  is  a  veritable  eclipse  of  that 
brilliant  luminary,  an  eclipse  not  foretold  in  the  almanac. 
But  lo  !  before  my  mental  vision  stalks  a  profane  person 
turning  up  his  nose  at  the  SUN.  "  Who  looks  there  for 
Art?"  Most  irreverent!  shall  we  try  the  Nation? 
Nil-admirari  is  not  always  blind  ;  may  possibly  have 
discovered  the  hidden  secrets  of  engraving  on  wood.  Let 
us  see.     But  the  Nation  requires  a  chapter  to  itself. 


"  NOBLE   SIMPLICITY  " 

"  ''  I  ^HERE  are  two  old  styles  of  wood-engraving  be- 
X  loved  of  purists  and  critical  students  of  this  art, 
and  each  of  them  is  noble  and  good  :  the  plain  black- 
outline  work,  best  known  to  moderns  in  Dtirer's  and  in 
Holbein's  designs ;  and  the  white-line  work  known  as 
Bewick's,  in  which  the  untouched  surface  of  part  of  the 
block  gives  strong  blacks,  into  which  the  white  is  car- 
ried by  touches  of  the  graver,  every  one  of  which  tells. 
We  might  add  to  these  the  so-called  '  chiaroscuro'  prints 
of  the  Italians  and  others  ;  but  their  large  scale  and  use 
of  tints,  of  color  and  of  shade,  put  them  to  one  side. 
The  black-outline  style  and  the  black-mass-and-white-line 
stvle  are  both  excellent,  and  those  who  love  them  may  be 
forgiven  for  feeling  a  certain  repulsion  from  modern 
work  ;  but  it  is  clear  that  modern  work  cannot  follow 
both  these  styles  at  once.  No  person  can  conceive  a 
combination   of  the  two.       We   agree   with   Mr.    Linton's 

H 


NOBLE    SIMPLICITY  15 

definition  of  the  first  as  a  mere  mechanical  cutting  out  of 
an  outline-drawing  made  by  a  master,  and  of  the  second 
as  the  earliest  and  greatest  development  of  fine  art  in 
wood-engraving  —  provided,  always,  that  we  except  the 
chiaroscuro  prints.  And  we  think  there  is  a  tendency 
visible  through  the  exaggerations  and  mistakes,  and  even 
the  affectations,  of  the  new  and  peculiar  style  of  engrav- 
ing which  is  now  being  developed  by  Scribner' s  Alonthly 
and  Harpei'''s  JMonthly,  to  work  back  towards  the  con- 
ception and  handling  of  the  Bewick  school.  Its  noble 
simplicity  it  may  not  be  for  the  nineteenth  century  to 
attain,  but  its  directness  of  method  we  may  reach  ;  and 
if  we  do,  it  will  be  through  such  work  as  Mr.  Linton 
either  assails  with  violence  or  passes  with  contemptuous 
silence." 

This  is  the  Nation's  summing  up  of  a  labored  and 
much-considered  article,  headed  "Fine  Arts  —  Wood- 
Engraving,"  reviewing  the  controversy  between  the  At- 
lantic and  Sc7'ibner.  Fine  words !  over  which  never- 
theless the  Reviewer  stumbles  and  breaks  his  shins. 
For  "  fine  words  butter  no  parsnips."  Let  us  examine 
the  whole  judicial  utterance  ! 

"  There  are  two  old  styles  of  wood-engraving  beloved 
of  purists  and  critical  students  of  this  art,  and  each  of 
them  is  noble  and  good  :  the  plain  black-outline  work, 
best  known  to  moderns  in  Durer's  and  in  Holbein's  de- 


16  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

signs;"  and  then,  "We  agree  with  Mr.  Linton's  defini- 
tion of  the  first  as  a  mere  mechanical  cutting-out  of  an 
outline-draivingy 

Now  one  would  suppose  tiiat  "  purists  and  critical 
students  of  this  art  "  would  at  least  have  some  clear  idea 
of  what  it  is  that  is  "  beloved  of"  them.  Also  the  Re- 
viewer of  Mr.  Linton's  writing  should  have  read,  not 
only  with  his  elbows,  what  Mr.  Linton's  definition  was  of 
the  engraving  of  Durcr's  and  Holbein's  designs.  Surely 
Mr.  Linton  never  defined  it  as  the  (mechanical  or  other) 
"  cutting  out  of  an  outline-drawing;"  simply  because,  as 
every  engraver  knows,  and  everv  print-collector  also 
knows,  neither  Diirer's  nor  Holbein's  designs  can  be  so 
defined.  Dlirer  did  draw  in  outline  —  his  Apocalypse^ 
for  instance  ;  Holbein  has  some  outline  designs  in  Eras- 
mus' Praise  of  Folly^  and  a  few  others  of  little  impor- 
tance elsewhere  ;  but  neither  can  have  his  work  charac- 
terized as  outline-work.  None  of  Diirer's  most  important 
drawings-on-wood  arc  in  outline:  the  Greater  Passion^ 
the  Little  Passion,  the  Life  of  the  Virgin^  the  Arch  of 
Alaximiliaii,  like  evervthing  else  I  can  call  to  mind  of 
any  importance,  are  all  shaded,  sometimes  even  rich  in 
color,  light  and  shadow.  I  repeat,  I  can  at  this  moment 
recollect  nothing  in  outline  except  the  Apocalypse.  Nor 
is  Holbein's  method  different,  save  in  the  slight  exceptions 
I  have  noted.     His  one  great  work  on  wood,  the  Dance 


NOBLE    SIMPLICITY  17 

of  Deatli.  is  certainly  not  in  ontlinc,  nor,  by  any  amount 
of  courteous  equivocation,  to  be  allowed  to  be  so  -defined. 
When  a  Reviewer  comes  out  so  grandiloquently  with  his 
purists  and  critical  students,  he  should  know  what  he  is 
talking  about.  Of  course  he  has  never  seen  the  original 
Dtirers  or  the  original  Holbeins  ;  I  know  they  are  scarce  : 
yet  he  need  not  take  all  upon  hearsay.  Is  it  possible  he 
has  never  fallen  across  any  of  the  many  copies  extant.? 
In  J.  W.  Bouton's  bookstore  (address  in  New  York  Di- 
rectory)^ or,  handier  perhaps,  at  the  New  York  Litho- 
graphic, Engraving,  and  Printing  Co.'s  (used  to  be  at 
i6  and  iS  Park  Place  —  may  have  removed  but  will  also 
be  found  in  the  Directory)^  the  Little  Passion  may  be 
seen,  reproduced  in  fac-simile,  so  that  the  critical  student 
cannot  be  deceived;  and  he  will  see  that  so  much  at  least 
of  Dtlrer's  work  is  not  to  be  defined  as  outline.  It  may 
be  worth  his  seeing  before  his  next  Fine-Art  article. 

But  though  the  charitable  re-reviewer  may  opine  that 
the  critical  student  has  never  seen  a  Dtirer  or  a  Holbein, 
said  student's  further  remarks  may  yet  be  instinct  with 
artistic  wisdom.  Give  him  the  benefit  of  the  iloubt  till 
you  have  read  the  following  ! 

Of  the  two  styles  beloved  of  him,  he  says,  one  is  the 
black-outline  (let  him  off  the  outline)  work  of  Durer  and 
Holbein  ;  the  other  the  white-line  work  known  as  Be- 
wick's, "•  In  -which  the    untouched  surface  of  part  of  the 


18  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

block  gives  st7'ong  blacks"  whereby  he  distinguishes  that 
from  the  Dtirer  black-not-outhne  style.  But  the  un- 
touched surface  of  the  block  gives  blacks  in  the  Diirer 
work  also  ;  does  so  likewise  in  the  veriest  outline  work : 
it  is  the  peculiarity  of  wood-engraving  and  all  work 
which  has  to  be  printed  from  the  surface.  And  the 
strojtg  blacks  he  notices  as  so  distinctive  of  the  Bewick 
blocks  are  not  in  any  sense  stronger  than  the  blacks  in 
the  Dtirer  blocks.  Indeed,  black  is  just  black  everywhere  ; 
and  one  black  differs  not  from  another  in  blackness.  It 
is  only  the  quantity  of  black,  or  its  relative  position,  that 
can  justify  you  in  saying  this  is  blacker  than  that. 
Wherefore  I  am  forced  to  admit  that  I  know  nothing  in 
Bewick's  work  more  black  —  with  a  greater  proportionate 
quantity  or  power  of  blackness  in  it —  than  the  blackness 
to  be  found  in  some  of  the  before-mentioned  Little  Pas- 
sion blocks  and  other  of  Diirer's  "outlines." 

I  am  closely  following  the  argument  of  my  learned 
friend.  Into  these  strong  blacks  of  Bewick's,  he  tells  us, 
"  the  "johite  is  carried  by  touches  of  the  graver^  every 
one  of  -which  tells."  This  almost  looks  like  technical  ac- 
quaintance. Yet  really  it  does  not  matter  what  the  block 
is,  or  whose,  Bewick's  or  anybody's  ;  every  touch  of  the 
graver  in  a  piece  of  wood  produces  white,  and  cannot  do 
otherwise.  The  Reviewer  is  merely  saying,  in  his  pecu- 
liar way,   in  words  that  are    not  very    clear,    not   being 


NOBLE    SIMPLICITY  19 

clear  himself,  that  the  untouched  part  of  the  Bewick 
block  (as  of  any  other)  would  print  solid  black,  and  when 
the  graver  cuts  out  a  piece  of  the  solid,  there  is  so  much 
white.  If  you  cut  a  piece  out  of  a  potato,  there  will  be 
a  piece  out.  We  need  not  a  Fine-Art  Reviewer  im- 
ported expressly  by   the  JVatio7t  to  tell  us  that. 

He  proceeds  :  —  "The  black-outline  style  and  the  black- 
mass-and-white-line  style  are  both  excellent,  and  those 
who  love  them  (purists  and  critical  art-students)  may  be 
forgiven  for  feeling  a  ceitain  repulsioii  from  modern 
work  ;  but  it  is  clear  that  modern  work  cannot  follow 
both  these  styles  at  once.  No  persofz  ca?z  conceive  a 
combination  of  the  t-ivo."  Gently  !  gently  !  A  combi- 
nation of  \vl)at  two?  Black  lines  left  on  the  block  and 
white  lines  cut  in  the  block?  My  good  sir!  are  you 
prepared  to  say  that  }  ou  ever  took  note  of  a  block  in 
which  there  was  not  that  combination?  I  do  not  tell 
you  that  the  two  styles  cannot  be  kept  distinct ;  I  only 
doubt  your  perception  of  the  diflerence.  Did  you  ever 
see  a  number  of  Harper's  Weekly  jfouriial  of  Civiliza- 
tion? In  any  number  of  that,  or  of  Harper's  Monthly^ 
or  of  our  favorite  Scribner^  you  may  find  your  inconceiv- 
able combination.  I  do  not  mean  (to  be  plain  with 
you)  that  you  will  find  anything  equal  to  a  Holbein 
"outline,"  whicli  was  cut  altogether  in  fac-similc  [the 
also    fac-similc    Jetlcrson,    p.  333     in     Scribner  for  July. 


20  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

is  not  quite  up  to  that]  ;  or  anything  even  of  the  guache 
series  so  good  as  Bewick's  white-line,  which,  as  you  cor- 
rectly inform  us,  was  done  by  touches  of  the  graver  [so 
was  the  Jefferson]  ;  but  you  will  find  black-line  of  the 
Holbein  fashion  —  if  not  to  be  beloved  like  the  Hol- 
beins,  and  white-line  as  in  Bewick  —  if  not  of  his 
artistic  excellence,  in  almost  every  cut  on  which  your 
"  certain  repulsion "  may  allow  you  to  set  a  purist's 
eyes. 

Yet  another  comment  as  you  continue.  Each  of  these 
styles  of  wood-engraving  (you  tell  us),  "  that  best  known 
to  moderns  in  Diirer's  and  in  Holbein's  designs  —  "  [Par- 
don me  a  moment!  Moderns  who  know  anything  about 
this  early  style  know  it  just  as  well  from  the  Ntiremberg 
Chi'onicle^  or  from  the  works  of  the  "  Little  Masters," 
as  from  any  other  plank-cuts.  Go  on  again  !]  "  Each 
of  these  styles" — that  known  in  Diirer's  and  Holbein's  de- 
signs, and  that  known  in  Bewick's  —  "is  noble  and  good." 
How  is  that  —  when  "  we  agree  with  Mr.  Linton's  defini- 
tion of  the  first  as  a  mere  mechanical  cutting-out".''  Very 
good  mere  mechanical  cutting  out  may  be ;  but  what  of 
nobleness  is  there  in  unskilled  carpenter's  work,  the  merest 
mechanism,  which  requires  but  hand-labor,  patience,  antl 
exactness,  and  has  never  need  or  even  room  for  art,  or 
taste,  or  judgment.?  Surely  noble  in  this  connection  is 
a    misapplied  term!      Each   noble  and  good?      And    no 


NOBLE    SIMPLICITY  21 

difference  between  the  ''mere  mechanical  cutting  out" 
and  the  "  greatest  development  of  fine  art  "  ?  Yes  !  one  : 
the  greatest  development  is  further  characterized  as  of 
"  noble  simplicity."  Simplicity  should  rather  belong  to 
the  ruder  and  primitive  method.  One  would  think  that 
it  were  simpler  to  outline  with  a  jack-knife,  and  to  gouge 
out  the  spaces  between  four  straight  lines,  or  even  four 
curved  lines,  than  to  draw  expressively  with  a  graver  — 
which  drawing  alone  entitled  Bewick  to  the  rank  of 
Artist.  "  Noble  simplicity  "  perhaps  means  something 
else  ;  but  will  not  in  any  sense  apply  to  Bewick.  His 
mechanism  was  not  so  much  simple  as  rude  ;  and  his 
work  is  noble  only  as  artist-work,  in  spite  of  mechan- 
ical disability  —  which   is   not  simplicity. 

Let  the  Reviewer  finish  !  Here  is  his  peroration,  his 
conclusion  of  the  whole  matter:  —  "  Wc  think  there  is  a 
tendency,  visible  through  the  exaggerations  and  i7iis- 
takcs,  and  even  the  affectations  of  the  new  and  pectdiar 
style  of  engraving  which  is  now  being  developed  in 
Scribner's  Monthly  and  in  Harper''s  Monthly,  to  work 
back  towards  the  conception  and  handling  of  the  Bewick 
school.  Its  noble  simplicity  it  may  not  be  for  the  nine- 
teenth century  to  attain"  [a  sad  look-out  for  the  masters 
of  the  peculiar  style]  ;  '-but  its  directness  of  method  we 
may  reacli  ;  and  if  we  do,  it  will  be  through  such  work 
as  Mr.  Linton  either  assails  with  violence  or  passes  with 
contemptuous  silence." 


22  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

Which  means  (if  it  be  worth  while  to  seek  the  mean- 
ing of  a  teacher  wliose  incompetence  is  so  manifest,  a 
critic  who  defines  Diirer's  work  as  outline,  and  who  in 
his  noble  simplicity  —  I  dare  wager  —  cannot  tell  a  Bewick 
from  a  Clennell)  tliat  the  artistic  and  most  nnmechanical 
handling  of  Bewick  is  to  be  "worked  back  to"  —  mean- 
ing perhaps  recovered — by  a  purely  mechanical  and 
utterly  unartistic  method,  the  tendency  to  such  recovery 
being  shown  in  the  exaggerations  and  mistakes  and 
affectations  of  its  mechanical  peculiarities,  in  such  en- 
<Travings  as  Mr.  Cole's  undeveloped  Emerson  —  suffi- 
ciently noticed  in  the  Atlantic^  and  the  "  pen-and-ink  " 
St.  Gaudens  —  to  be  noticed  hereafter,  in  Scribner  for 
June. 

What  we  ought  to  understand  by  the  co7iceptio7t  of 
the  Bewick  school  I  am  at  a  loss  to  conceive.  The 
knowledge  may  not  be  necessary  for  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury. Twenty  years  hence  some  Nation  Reviewer  may 
explain,  and  tell  us  also  how  elaboration  of  useless  work 
and  multiplication  of  meaningless  lines  betray  their  ten- 
dency towards  directness  of  method.  The  nature  of  my 
present  subject  may  excuse  me  from  following  the  Re- 
viewer further  into  chiaroscuro.  He  is  probably  as 
clear  in  his  obscurity  there  as  in  his  perception  of  black 
and  white.  Only  I  may  inform  him  that  he  is  wrong  as 
to  the  exceeding  size  of  such  works.     They  are  not  larger 


NOBLE    SIMPLICITY  23 

than  many  things  in  what  he  calls  outline.  Dtlrer's  Arch 
of  Maximiliaji  measures  some  ten  feet  each  way.  I 
speak  from  recollection,  not  actual   measurement. 

Does  an  innocent  reader  wonder  that  the  editor  of 
the  N^aiioti  can  publish  such  a  farrago?  What  is  a 
poor  editor  to  do?  Mostly  or  nearly  omniscient,  he  does 
not  know  everything.  Of  engraving  on  wood  I  may 
safely  assert  that  an  editor  is  sometimes  without  exten- 
sive knowledge.  Wliat  can  he  do,  when  our  subscribers 
have  to  be  told  concerning  it?  O'C.  writes  readably  on 
art-subjects  ;  he  has  the  rim  of  the  studios,  has  crammed 
himself  with  art-nomenclature,  knows  what  guache  is, 
and  is  up  to  scutnblhtg.  So  O'C.  is  detailed  for  an 
article  concerning  wood-engraving. 

Having  studied  the  cookery-book,  he  first  catches  his 
engraver.  Honest  man,  he  goes  at  once  to  head-quarters 
for  the  information  that  shall  put  a  soul  into  his  periods. 
Now  we  engravers,  "  the  most  industrious  of  workers," 
if  we  ma}'  not  drink  like  draughtsmen,  or  Reviewers,  are 
not  universally  inaccessible  to  beer.  Although  an  Eng- 
lishman, I  can  drink  some  myself.  In  the  present  diffi- 
culty the  talismanic  words,  instead  of  Open  Scsa?fic,  are 
Zzvci  Lager.  Behold  us  insifle  the  cave,  embryo  Re- 
viewer (only  interviewer  as  yet)  and  his  captured  instruc- 
tor, seated  at  some  round  or  square  table  in  a  quiet 
corner,   where    unmolested  we   may  pursue  our  studies, 


24  HINTS   ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

make  inquiries,  and  note  down  replies ;  only  occasionally 
interrupting  our  research  with  the  cabalistic  sign  of  two 
fingers  held  up  bar-ward,  when  fresh  draughts  of  the 
soothing  if  not  inspiring  fluid  help  us  on  our  dreary 
way.  How  many  afternoons  must  be  devoted  before  such 
a  mass  of  information  as  that  three  cents'  worth  in  the 
Sun  can  be  noted  down,  the  mere  fruit  of  inquiry  gath- 
ered, to  be  afterwards  pressed  and  strained  and  watered, 
shall  we  sav  also  fusil-oiled  to  give  the  required  pun- 
gency?—  and  then  tlie  vintage  fresh  from  the  wood 
served  out  through  the  editorial  tap  !  Is  it  not  rather  a 
wonder  that  newspaper  readers  are  put  in  possession  of 
so  much  ;  which,  if  they  cannot  understand,  they  yet  in 
their  noble  simplicity  may  believe  to  be  ver}'  good? 
Only  I  would  advise  them  not  implicitly  to  trust  even  the 
little  they  may  think  intelligible.  Interviewers  may  be 
experts  ;  but  their  evidence  would  not  stand  as  such  in 
a  court  of  law.  See  what  a  mess  both  Sun  and  Nation 
have  made  of  this  engraving  matter!  Do  not  imagine 
that  they  are  singularly  luifortunate.  An  editor  cannot 
help  it.  He  can  but  pick  up  his  man,  see  that  his  Eng- 
lish is  tolerable,  and  keep  unnecessary  personalities  out 
of  his  paper.  That  last  item  it  were  well  if  he  supervised 
more  religiously. 

For    the  rest,    reviews  are  not  always   so  honestly  ob- 
tained and  furnished  as  that  of  our  accomplished  cellar- 


NOBLE    SIMPLICITY  25 

man.  Private  malice  (of  which  the  editor  cannot  he 
aware)  may  creep  in.  Would  yon  care  to  read  A's 
"  opinion "  of  B's  engraving,  when  you  knew  that  A 
lay  in  wait  for  the  opportunity  to  revile  B,  because  B 
had  not  admired  A's  sister's  drawings?  Such  petty  mo- 
tives do  actuate  Reviewers  ;  and  find  encouragement  in 
mutual-admiration  societies,  small  semi-private  clubs  or 
coteries,  whose  members  esteem  it  the  whole  duty  of 
man,  or  woman,  to  laud  and  magnify  each  other,  and  to 
fall  foul  on  all  who  doubt  their  claim  to  glory. 

x\gainst  these  abuses  of  reviewership  there  is  but  one 
safeguard  and  but  one  remedy.  The  safeguard  is  to  trust 
no  anonymous  writing.  The  remcdv  will  be  a  whole- 
some law  against  such  writing.  The  "  remedy  "  of  an 
action  for  libel  against  an  impecunious  slanderer  or  a 
wealtliy  vendor  of  slander,  is  not  of  much  avail.  Hon- 
orable Reviewers  of  course  there  are,  men  who  would 
disdain  to  let  their  personal  feelings  have  weight  for  or 
against  their  unbiassed  opinions.  Capable  men  there 
aie  too,  even  in  art-matters,  who  know  the  limit  of 
their  own  knowledge  and  who  would  not  consent  to 
pronounce  on  subjects  on  which  they  had  to  be  coached. 
But  how  shall  3  ou  distinguish  these  while  all  alike  con- 
sent to  wear  the  coward's  mask?  The  uninitiated  can- 
not always  discern  a  writer's  style.  And  when  the 
writer  has   no  style.?     You  fancy  you  have  the  erudition 


26 


HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 


of  Mr.  Shinn,  and  it  is  only  the  eloquence  of  Mr.  Laf- 
fan,  or  vice  versa.  It  does  not  matter.  The  public  is 
an  unseeing  public ;  and  in  the  country  of  the  blind 
Polyphemus-Anonymus  bears  rule  as — "a  Reviewer." 


K.-^ 


TWO    ART   CRITICS 
After  Holbein  —  from  the  Fraise  of  Fc"y. 


FAC-SIMILE 

F AC-SIMILE,  to  explain  for  the  benefit  of  the  un- 
scholarly, —  including  Reviewers  who  take  it  to 
mean  outline, — fac-simile  is  a  compound  Latin  word 
meaning  so7nething  done  i?z  exact  likeness  of  something 
else. 

Exact  likeness.  Bear  this  in  mind  !  A  reduction  or 
an  enlargement  is  not  a  fac-simile  ;  and  when  a  pen-and- 
ink  drawing  is  reduced  even  by  the  exactest  photography, 
and  so  placed  on  the  wood,  the  engraving  can  only  be 
a  fac-simile  of  the  photograph.  It  is  not  a  fac-simile  of 
the  original  pen-and-ink  drawing.  A  noteworthy  instance 
of  the  mistake  of  supposing  a  i-eduction  to  be  a  fac- 
simile is  to  be  found  in  the  History  of  Wood-engraving 
by  Jackson  and  Chatto.  Jackson,  to  show  the  character 
of  the  plank-blocks,  gives  a  representation  of  one  —  a 
Rubens.  The  size  of  the  original  block  is  perhaps 
two  feet  by  sixteen  inches.     He  reduces  it  to  about  three 

27 


28  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

inches  by  two.  Of  course  the  reduced  cut,  not  being  a 
fac-simile,  gives  the  design  and  nothing  more  ;  does  not 
show  the  style  of  work,  and  so  is  worthless  for  the  pur- 
pose for  which  he  took  it — as  an  example  of  plank- 
cutting. 

Fac-simile,  as  applied  to  engraving  on  wood,  means 
that  the  drawing  or  photograph  on  the  wood  is  chiefly 
in  lines,  which  lines  should  be  distinct,  not  blurred,  or 
rubbed  in  confusedly.  Whatever  of  rubbing  in  or  blur- 
ring, or  of  what  is  called  tint  (washing  in  with  a  brush), 
is  in  the  drawing  is  so  much  of  departure  from  pure 
fac-simile.  These  clear  and  definite  lines  the  engraver 
has  to  faithfully  preserve,  so  as  to  produce  by  his  en- 
graving an  exact  repetition  of  the  drawing  or  photo- 
graph. An  outline-drawing  must  be  cut  in  fac-simile ; 
but  a  fac-simile  is  not  necessarily  an  outline-drawing. 
Plate  I  (engraved  by  E.  J.  Whitney  from  a  drawing  by 
John  Gilbert,  one  of  the  artist's  early  drawings  before 
success  and  newspaper  haste  had  led  him  into  careless- 
ness) we  will  hex'e  consider  as  an  example  of  fac-simile 
work,  the  exact  representation  of  Gilbert's  lines  with  the 
exception  —  the  exception  proving  the  rule  —  of  some 
small  portions  which  I  proceed  to  point  out.  The  con- 
stable's waistcoat,  the  shadow  over  the  basket  and  under 
the  old  woman's  cloak,  the  shadow  of  the  basket-handle 
on  her  arm,  a  little  bit  under  the  basket,   the  shadowed 


"^--^"^..^^T^^ 


Plate  i. 


FAC-SIMILE  29 

face  of  the  boy  in  front,  some  slight  shadow  on  the  two 
distant  figures  at  the  right  of  the  cut,  and  it  iiiay  be  the 
level  sky,  are  engraved  in  regular  lines,  indicating  that 
Gilbert  had  merely  rubbed  in  those  parts,  trusting  to  the 
engraver  to  render  his  effect  with  suitable  lines.  The 
rest  may  be  considered  as  exact  to  the  drawing,  cleanly 
cut,  line  for  line  —  very  excellent  work.  I  do  not  mean 
that  there  is  any  pretence  of  passing  it  off  as  the  likeness 
of  a  pencil-drawing.  Gilbert's  lines,  many  of  them,  were 
certainly  grey  ;  and  in  the  printed  cut,  however  delicately 
printed,  the  most  delicate  lines  are  black.  I  have  known 
men  draw  with  a  silver  point,  so  that  their  firmest  lines 
were  grey,  not  black  ;  and  a  photograph,  even  from  a 
black-line  drawing,  may  be  not  black,  but  brown,  on  the 
wood.  It  is  therefore  not  a  mock  pencil-drawing  or 
sham  photograph  which  the  exact  engraver  produces,  but 
a  fair  and,  so  nearly  as  his  mechanical  skill  enables  him, 
a  close  reproduction  in  black  lines  of  the  grey  lines  of  tlie 
pencil,  the  brown  lines  of  the  photograph,  or  the  jjositive 
black  lines  (but  even  here  some  lines  may  not  have  been 
really  black)   of  the  pen-and-ink  drawing. 

On  the  first  rude  plank-blocks  —  I  suppose  on  all  — 
the  drawings  were  made  with  brush  or  pen  in  bold, 
firm,  unvarying  black  lines,  with  little  crossing  of  the 
lines.  Gravers  could  not  be  used  on  the  plank,  as  the 
grain   would   rough   up,  or    the   wood   split  and  rend,  ac- 


30  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

cording  to  the  direction  in  which  you  attempted  to  cut. 
All  this  old  work  was  done  with  knives,  and  gouges  for 
the  broader  lights  or  masses  of  white ;  and  as  the  work 
became  more  difficult,  from  the  greater  elaboration  or 
minuteness  of  the  drawings,  variously-shaped  knives,  and 
gouges  of  different  sizes  to  clear  out  tlie  larger  spaces, 
came  into  use. 

The  earliest  of  these  plank-blocks,  on  which,  before 
the  invention  of  movable  types,  both  picture  and  lettering 
were  cut,  were  very  rude.  Any  boy  could  cut  such. 
When  purists  go  into  ecstasies  over  the  noble  engraving- 
work  from  Diirer's  drawings,  they  do  but  ignorantly 
rave  and  imagine  a  vain  thing.  The  designs  are  noble, 
and  the  drawing  ;  but  the  engraving  is  only  mechanism, 
not  always  skilled  mechanism.     The  cutting  here-beneath 


FAC-SIMILE  31 

is  a  tolerably  close  copy  of  part  of  an  engraving  from  the 
Greater  Passion^  and  may  serve  to  show  the  character  of 
the  best  work  on  these  plank-blocks.  Skilfnl  indeed  is  the 
mechanism  of  the  cnts  of  Holbein's  Dance  of  Death. 
Wonderfully  minute  and  precise  and  delicate  must  have 
been  Holbein's  touch  ;  and  one  would  hesitate  before  de- 
nying to  workmen  who  could  perceive  and  preserve  that 
delicacy  some  title  to  be  considered  artists.  Notwith- 
standing, if  there  is — and  surch'  tlierc  is  —  a  distinction 
to  be  insisted  on  between  the  artist  and  the  mechanic^ 
we  can  but  at  last  place  the  producers  of  even  such  con- 
summate workmanship,  at  the  head  of  the  mechanical 
class  certainly,  but  not  higher.  Excepting  these  Hol- 
beins  and  very  little  else  of  the  old  time,  Japanese  cut- 
ting of  to-day,  of  the  same  character,  is  quite  as  good  as 
that  so  lauded  and  beloved  of  purists ;  and  some  quite 
recent  German  work  far  more  skilful,  of  such  clearness 
.and  delicacy  as  scarcely  to  be  distinguished  from  the  best 
fac-simile  done  with  the  graver. 

Bewick's  \vork  was  all  graver-work  (if  any  one  used 
the  graver  on  wood  before  him,  I  do  not  know),  cut  on 
the  end  of  the  grain,  on  rounds,  or  parts  of  rounds  of 
boxwood,  a  wood  chosen  because,  while  hard  and  close- 
grained,  it  yet  is  easily  cut.  The  old  plank-blocks  were 
of  jiear,  lime,  or  some  other  kind  of  soft  wood,  more  easily 
cut  and  so  more  suitable  for  knife-work. 


32  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

Bewick's  work  was  in  white-line  ;  that  is,  his  drawing 
being  made  with  a  brush,  and  perhaps  some  little  defini- 
tion with  a  pencil,  he  trusted  to  his  graver  for  the  rest, 
inventing  the  requisite  lines  as  he  went  on.  Of  this 
white-line  work  I  shall  speak  later.  I  confine  myself 
now  to  fac-simile  —  the  leaving  of  lines  drawn,  as  in 
Plate  I  and  other  cuts,  Durer's,  etc.,  of  which  I  have 
spoken. 

Branston  (contemporary  with  Bewick,  though  not  quite 
so  early)  and  his  school,  also  used  the  graver  ;  and  since 
them  English,  French,  and  American  engravers  have 
done  the  same.  They  were  using  knife-tools  in  Paris 
sixty  years  ago,  when  Charles  Thompson,  a  younger 
brother  of  John,  went  there  to  establish  himself  as  an  en- 
graver. In  Germany  I  am  not  sure  that  knives,  as  well 
as  gravers,  are  not  used  even  to   the  present  day. 

Branston  and  Thompson  engraved  in  both  white-line 
and  fac-simile.  I  use  the  word  fac-simile  in  contradis- 
tinction to  white-line  because  in  both  cases  the  engrav- 
ing is  printed  in  black  ;  and  the  talk  of  "  black-outline  " 
as  the  opposite  of  white-line   is   meaningless. 

Thurston's  drawings  for  John  Thompson,  in  which 
Thompson's  excellence  as  an  engraver  was  first  mani- 
fested, were,  I  believe,  drawn  line  for  line  on  the  wood, 
as  if  he  were  etciiing  on  a  plate,  only  with  the  regularity 
of  line  to  which  a  line-entrraver  is  educated  and  which 


FAC-SIMILE  33 

the  freer-handed  etcher  avoids.  I  do  not  say  that  al! 
were  so  drawn,  though  I  have  seen  sucli  from  his  hand. 
Thompson  probably  did  not  cut  any  in  quite  absolute 
fac-simile,  because  in  most  of  his  work,  certainly  in  all 
his  later  work,  there  is  the  stamp  of  his  own  individu- 
ality ;  and  Thurston,  no  doubt,  knowing  Thompson's 
ability  in  white-line,  would  have  often  spared  himself 
the  drawing  of  mere  lines,  trusting  to  Thompson  to  draw 
with  his  graver  the  sufficient  equivalent  —  a  mf)re  regular 
tint.  In  the  parts  I  noted  as  exceptional  in  Plate  I,  the 
same  license  is  observable.  That  combination  of  the  two 
styles,  so  impossible  for  the  Natioit  critic  to  conceive,  is 
to  be  seen  there,  as  it  is  throughout  Thompson's  Thurs- 
ton-work  ;  the  fac-simile  not  absolutely  exact,  but  only 
departed  from  as  taste  and  judgment  ordered,  when  the 
engraver's  own  white-line  was  brought  into  use.  Infe- 
rior to  Bewick  as  an  artist,  claiming  no  originality  as  a 
designer,  John  Thompson  is  unequalled  as  an  engraver. 
The  same  taste  and  judgment  are  recognizable  in  Plate 
I  and  in  the  cut  at  page  69.  "  Washed  drawings,"  how- 
ever, from  Bewick's  first  beginning  were  in  common 
use,  —  drawings  in  tints,  for  which  the  engraver  had  to 
design  the  representative  lines.  Drawings  on  wood  were 
either  such,  or  else  generally  of  the  mixed  fac-simile  I 
have  described  as  Tluirston's,  in  which  the  copper-plate 
"  line-engraving  "  was  taken  as  pattern.     So  the  absolute 


34  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

fac-simile  of  the  old  plank-cutters  went  somewhat  out  of 
fashion,  but  certainly  never  out  of  use.  The  Cruikshanks 
and  Seymour  maintained  its  reputation.  Every  appren- 
tice was  taught  to  master  fac-simile  before  venturing  on 
his  own  lines.  The  kind  of  "  fac-simile  "  for  which  the 
brothers  Dalziel  were  famous,  and  with  which  I  have 
found  fault,  was  not,  as  an  ignorant  Reviewer  has  stated, 
a  "  resuscitation  "  of  the  old  plank-work ;  and  though  it 
is  true  that  I  compared  it  with  that  as  being  only  me- 
chanical^ I  never  spoke  of  it  as  reaching  to  any  even 
mechanical  excellence.  The  manufacturers  to  whom  I 
objected  did  not  indeed  cut  in  fac-simile  {exact  folloxv- 
ing  of  the  drawing)  ;  but  were  content  to  leave  un- 
meaning wood,  "  near  enough,"  in  place  of  drawn  lines, 
as  the  following  diagrams  will  explain. 

A  —  Durer-work  :  lines  cut  by  a  careful  knife- 
nser  of  the  early  time  :  an  exact  reproduction 
(tliat  is,  fac-simile)  of  the  lines  drawn.  Good 
graver-work  is  of  the  same  character. 
B  —  Dalziel-work.  The  same  lines  as  in  A, 
but  as  they  would  be  engraved  by  the  near- 
enough  fac-simile  school;  which  a  well- 
trained  Chinese  rat  would  gnaw  out  with 
more  nearness.  The  example  is  of  course  much  mag- 
nified, as  the  difference  might  pass  uniioticed  in  very 
"fine"  —  that  is  to  say,   minute  work. 


FAC-SIMILE 


35 


This  (B)  is  the  pretence  of  fac-simile  against  which 
I  have  always  striven  as  deteriorating  and  demoralizing 
the  worker,  whatever  excuse  might  be  foimd  for  it  in  the 
unintelligilMlity  and  worthlcssness  of  the  confused  net- 
work of  lines  with  wliich  Leech  and  Gilbert,  and  other 
hasty  or  slovenly  or  careless  draughtsmen,  covered  so 
large  a  portion  of  their  drawings.  For  Leech,  if  he 
rarely  considered  a  line  (proof,  the  Stin  critic  thinks, 
of  his  certainty  of  hand),  it  was  not  because  it  did  not 
need  consideration,  but  because  he  had  not  the  faculty, 
wanting  an  artist's  education  :  which  is  not  underrating 
his  natural  artistic  gift. 

In  course  of  time  the  Dalziel  rats  improved,  and  at  last 
turned  out  some  really  good  fac-simile  work,  clean, 
honest,  and  minute,  but  at  best  mechanical.  The  me- 
chanics in  Punch  also  improved,  in  a  great  measure 
owing  to  the  careful  drawings  of  Tenniel. 

It  is  good  fac-simile  work,  however  mechanical,  when 
the  lines  are  so  cleanly  cut  that  they  look  like  steel-en- 
graving, whether  laid  regularly  and  designedly  as  in  a 
"  line-engraving,"  or  loosely  and  easily  (not  carelessly) 
as  in  a  good  etching.  Of  course  there  can  be  good  fac- 
simile rendering  of  even  a  careless  drawing  ;  the  engrav- 
er's skill  thrown  away  on  it,  as  on  the  Jeflcrson  and  the 
St.  Gaudens,  in  Scrib7ier  (July  and  June).  The  test  of 
good  work  is  readily  applied,  even  by  the  most  ignorant 


36  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

of  inquirers.  Refer  again  to  examples  A  and  B,  at 
page  34.  The  best  pure  fac-simile  work  I  know  of  at 
the  present  day  will  be  found  occasionally  in  the  Ger- 
man illustrated  papers.  I  call  to  mind,  though  I  cannot 
at  this  writing  place  them  for  reference,  certain  portraits 
which  might  fairly  pass  for  engravings  on  steel,*  the 
highest  praise  I  can  give  to  works  of  such  perfect  mechan- 
ism. But  note  that  all  this  is  mechanism,  and  not  art. 
The  Dalziel-work  is,  I  think,  sufficiently  shown  to  be 
not  fac-simile  at  all.  Using  the  term  "  Dalziel-work,"  I 
am  merely  giving  a  name  to  the  whole  class  of  dishon- 
est, "near-enough"  pretence  of  following  lines,  without 
any  real  care  to  maintain  them  in  their  purit}',  —  work 
which  I  have  already  described,  which  the  Dalziel  es- 
tablishment was,  I  think,  mainly  instrumental  in  popu- 
larizing, although  it  is  to  be  seen  also  in  the  early  num- 
bers of  Pttnch^  and  wherever  else  cheap  cutting  was 
thought  good  enough  for  the  publisher's  purpose.  I 
would   by   no  means  la}'   all    the    responsibility   upon   the 

*  Lest  the  Reviewer  suppose  that  this  contradicts  what  I  said 
in  the  Atlantic,  that  it  is  710  Jiattery  to  have  a  wood-e7igravi)ig 
supposed  to  be  on  steel,  I  would  observe  that  I  am  here  speaking 
of  only  facsimile,  the  mechanical  excellence  of  which  cannot 
be  other  than  an  imitation  of  metal-work.  In  all  but  this 
mechanical  fac-simile,  wood-work  has  its  own  peculiar  excel- 
lence, which  ought  not  to  be  mistaken. 


FAC-SIMILE  37 

Dalziels,  and  mention  their  name,  as  I  name  also  Leech 
and  Gilbert,  only  as  repiesentative.  They  were  not  the 
only  sinners.  And  here,  lest  again  I  be  taken  to  task  for 
spite  and  personal  animosity,  by  some  gentle-souled  Re- 
viewer, I  embrace  the  occasion  to  declare  that  I  mean 
no  disrespect  personally  to  the  brothers  Dalziel,  men,  so 
far  as  I  had  opportunity  of  judging  of  them  (and  I  was 
not  without  opportunity),  honorable  and  of  considerable 
talent,  and  I  suppose  not  without  artistic  instincts  and 
care  for  reputation  as  artists.  .  Nevertheless  they  seem, 
to  me,  in  this  matter  of  engraving  to  have  preferred  suc- 
cess in  business  to  success  in  art.  It  is  said  you  cannot 
serve  God  and  Mammon.  Their  art  has  suffered  accord- 
ingly, and  their  example  has  been  harmful  to  engraving 
in  general.  Something  has  to  be  said,  too,  not  only  of 
the  carelessness,  but  also  of  the  foolishness  of  painters 
who,  insisting  on  their  every  line  being  kept,  could  not 
see  or  did  not  notice  that  it  was  kept  only  in  appearance, 
not  in  reality.     Take  notice  again  of 


I  have  praised  the  German  work  for  its  likeness  to  steel. 
Strictly    speaking,    all    absolutely    fac-simile    work,    from 


38  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

Diirer's  to  the  latest  Scribner^  is  but  an  imitation 
of  steel  (or  copper),  a  rendering,  by  wood  left  on  the 
surface,  of  the  lines  which  in  a  steel  engraving  are  in- 
dented. The  one  reason  for  having  such  woik  done  on 
wood  is  that  it  can  be  printed  with  t3'pe.  It  never  can 
rival  the  delicacy  of  steel. 

In  artistic  worth,  beyond  this  exact  fac-simile  is  the 
rendering  of  line-drawings  (in  outline  or  with  complica- 
tion of  lines)  in  which  the  very  line  itself  has  variety  and 
feeling:  not  to  be  seen  in  the  work  of  the  ordinary 
draughtsman.  Such  lines  will  be  found  in  pencil-draw- 
ings by  Flaxman  or  Mulready  ;  and  in  some  little  pen- 
and-ink  outlines  by  Stothard,  in  Rogers'  Poc?ns,  men- 
tioned in  my  Atlaiitic  article.  No  mere  mechanic  could 
perceive  or  without  perceiving  reproduce  the  subtle 
beauty  of  these  last.  Thompson,  the  master  of  the 
graver,  was  not  artist  enough  for  that ;  and  the  advan- 
tage an  artist  may  have  even  in  ''mechanical"  work 
was  shown  by  Clennell's  rendering  of  some  of  these.  I 
have  them  by  three  hands.  One  man,  only  a  mechanic, 
missed  their  beauty  altogether :  yet  I  dare  say  the  unar- 
tistic  critic  and  purist  might  have  praised  him  for  his 
exact  rcinodiiction  of  the  drawing,  and  found  a  noble 
simplicity  in  his  work.  Thompson,  perhaps  from  his 
very  mastership  not  caring  for  close  exactitude,  also 
missed    the    beauty  of  touch  in  the  originals.     Of  course 


FAC-SIMII,E  39 

he  came  very  much  nearer  than  the  mechanic  :  but  the 
cuts  are  Thompson's.  Only  Clennell  reproduced  Stoth- 
ard.  The  one  man  could  stamp  the  inark  of  his  own 
genius  and  individuality  upon  them.  His  was  a  higher 
art  who  forgot  himself  in   his  work. 

I  speak  of  this  (not  able  to  give  specimens,  and  know- 
ing that  the  work  is  too  scarce  for  reference)  to  show  that 
I  appreciate  and  to  obtain  appreciation  for  the  difficulty 
of  engraving  even  the  simplest  work  ;  and  to  emphasize 
the  necessity  of  artistic  feeling  in  everything  that  is  to 
bear  the  name  of  Art.  I  return  to  Plate  I,  having  yet 
some  remarks  to  make  on  the  already  indicated  differ- 
ences of  fac-simile. 

Observe  especially  the  lines  on  the  right  thigh  of  the 
constable.  They  are  probably  line  for  line  where  Gilbert 
drew  them  ;  but  yet  they  are  not  his  lines,  nor  could  he 
have  drawn  such.  They  are  graver-lines.  They  are  not 
merely  mechanical  rendering,  nor  only  the  i-egular  lines 
in  place  of  rubbing-in  which  I  elsewhere  distinguished  ; 
they  arc  such  artistic  work  as  Thompson  put  in  his 
Thurston  drawings.  The  same  sort  of  rendering  will  be 
found  wherever  the  engraver  is  the  equal  of  the  draughts- 
man. He  does  not  servilely,  Chinese-like,  repeat  each 
individual  line.  Where  the  draughtsman  has  halted  or 
slipped,  drawn  falsely  or  insufficientlv,  he  takes  his  place, 
enters   into  the  spirit  of  his  work,  corrects,  and  can  some- 


40  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

times  more  truthfully  express  the  real  intention  of  the 
original  even  in  what  we  have  called,  and  for  distinction's 
sake  must  call,  fac-simile. 

So  I  would  lead  the  student  of  wood-engraving  to  un- 
dei-stand  that  of  "  fac-simile  "  there  are  four  kinds:  — 

I — Absolutely  exact  mechanical  rendering:  whether 
of  the  old  plank-cutting,  or  as  in  ordinary  good  graver- 
work  since.  An  excellent  example  of  the  last  may  be 
found  in  Scribner  for  August :  Jungling's  "  Riault  the 
Engraver,"  page  488. 

2  —  Equally  exact  but  artistic  rendering  (for  there  is 
artistic  exactness  as  well  as  mechanical  exactness)  of 
such  exceptional  drawings  as  the  Stothards  :  the  nearest 
to  which  in  the  mechanical  class  are  the  cuts  in  Holbein's 
Dance  of  Death.  No  classification  can  be  perfectly  cor- 
rect. Only  we  must  sometimes  classify,  to  get  through 
comparison  at  clearness  of  judgment. 

3  —  Not  exact  rendering,  but  artistic  modification  and 
ti'anslation  of  even  clearly-drawn  lines,  vvhich  I  may  call 
the  Thompson  manner ;  such  as  I  have  noted  in  his  ren- 
dering of  the  Stothards  and  throughout  his  Thurston- 
work.     This  kind  also  may  be  seen  in  Plate  I. 

4 — Unexact,  careless,  dirty,  "near-enough  "  rendering: 
which  passes  as  fac-simile  only  with  as  careless  observers 
or  those  who  are  utterly  ignorant  of  engraving.  Unar- 
tistic,    and    without   even    mechanical    correctness,    such 


FAC-SIMILE 


41 


work  (as  my  reader  will  now  perceive)  is  not  really  fac- 
simile, the  indispensable  condition  of  which,  whether 
mechanical  or  artistic,  is  clearness  of  line,  especially 
where  lines  cross. 

I  have  perhaps  said  enough  to  enable  an  intelligent 
reader  to  know  what  engraving-in-fac-simile  is.  I  pass 
on  to  white-line  work,  the  true  and  more  distinctive 
province  of  wood-engraving.  In  saying  which  I  am 
happily  not  contradicted  by  the  Reviewers. 


WHITE-LINE 

WHITE-LINES  in  wood  are  produced  —  as  the 
Reviewer  has  informed  us  —  by  taking  pieces  of 
wood  out  of  a  plain  wood-surface,  called  a  block  by 
wood-engravers,  with  a  "  graver,"  a  tool  used  for  that 
purpose.  You  can,  according  to  the  size  of  the  graver 
and  the  energic  force  of  your  hand,  take  or  cut  out  a 
small  piece  or  a  large  piece,  and  cut  a  short  line  or  a 
long  line  ;  and  wherever  these  pieces  are  taken  out,  be 
they  round  or  square  or  of  shape  most  indescribable,  be 
they  narrow  or  broad,  or  short  or  long,  when  you  ink 
the  block  (the  effect  the  same  on  a  plank)  and  press  it 
firmly  upon  paper,  there  will  be  white  specks  or  lines, — 
the  rest  of  the  impression,  if  you  have  ink  and  impres- 
sion enough,  being  "strong"  black.  From  my  friend 
the  Nation  Reviewer's  attempt  at  explanation  I  gather  or 
deduce  so  much  :  and  speaking  as  a  practical  engraver, 
I    may   say   the  description    is   correct.       I   hope  it  is  as 

42 


WHITE-LINE  43 

intelligible  as  true.  Plate  II  (the  Crucifixion^  a  copy  of 
a  wood-cut,  or  metal  plate  engraved  wood-fashion,  by  the 
hand  of  the  poet-painter  William  Blake)  shows  exactly 
what  "  white-line  "  is. 

It  will  at  once  be  noticed  that,  though  the  black  in  this 
engraving  is  not  any  stronger  than  the  black  in  Plate  I, 
or  than  the  black  in  the  printed  letters  of  this  sentence, 
yet  there  is  much  black.  There  would  of  course  have 
been  less  black  if  more  of  the  wood  had  been  cut  away, 
as  in  Plates  III  and  IV  ;  still  less  had  so  much  been  cut 
away  as  in  Plate  I :  but  in  all  these  four  engravings,  and 
though  we  call  the  first  (Plate  I)  black-line  (say  fac-simile) 
and  the  other  three  white-line,  the  process  is  one  and  the 
same.  In  fact  a  wood-engraving  (till  Scrihner  shall  help 
us  with  some  nezv  invention)  is  only  pi'oducible  by  cut- 
ting away  wJiat  you  mean  to  be  xvhite  and  leavijzg  what 
you  intend  to  be  black.  So  far  the  procedure  is  the  very 
reverse  of  what  is  known  as  engraving  on  steel  or  copper  : 
albeit  it  will  easily  be  understood  that  the  wood-method 
can  be  followed  on  metal  also,  —  not  so  conveniently, 
metal  being  harder  than  wood.  It  is  followed  on  steel 
and  copper  and  brass  when  for  certain  purposes  the 
metal  is  required.  The  English  penny  postage-stamp,  a 
very  beiiutiful  piece  of  work,  was  (if  my  recollection  is 
not  at  fault)  engraved  on  metal  by  John  Thompson, 
the  wood-engraver.       Book-binders'  ornamental   tools,  or 


44  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

stamps,   on  metal  —  as  they  have  to   resist  heat,  are  en- 
graved in  the  same  manner.     To  return  to  wood. 

This  cutting  away  of  whites  and  leaving  blacks  being 
the  necessity  of  surface-printed  wood-engraving,  in  what 
consists  the  difference  between  fac-simile  as  already  de- 
scribed and  "white  line"?  In  this:  —  In  the  first  the 
engraver,  as  already  said,  having  his  lines  laid  down 
by  the  pencil,  pen,  etc.,  has  only  to  outline  such  lines 
with  his  graver  (of  old  his  knife)  and  then  to  clear 
away  to  sufficient  depth  (that  the  ink  may  not  touch  it) 
the  intervening  wood.  There  may  be  scope  in  fac- 
simile, as  has  been  already  shown,  for  artistic  as  well  as 
for  mechanical  treatment,  but  the  engraver  is  still  more 
or  less  closely  confined  to  certain  lines.  In  what  we 
call  white-line  work  the  engraver  has  only  a  tinted,  or 
washed,  drawing  on  the  wood,  with  perhaps  some  pen- 
ciling, part,  it  may  be,  rubbed  in  and  part  in  lines, 
chiefly  with  the  purpose  of  better  defining  those  portions 
which  the  draughtsman  did  not  consider  sufficiently 
made^out.  Here  the  engraver  is  raised  from  being  the 
humble  follower  of  the  draughtsman  into  an  equality 
with  him,  having  now  to  furnish  the  lines  which  shall 
best  represent  the  unlined  drawing.  That  is  to  say,  he 
must  draw  with  his  graver.  Bewick  would  not  have 
troubled  himself  to  draw  a  feather  line  for  line  ;  whether 
he  drew  it  with  brush  or  pencil,  he  left  the  lines  for  his 


WIIITE-I.INE  45 

graver.  It  was  a  freiir  method  of  working.  And  now 
notice  the  result!  Had  he  drawn  line  lor  line,  those 
black  lines  (black  when  printed)  had  given  him  only  a 
poor  imitation  of  a  copper-plate.  Almost  the  best  fac- 
simile must  sutler  in  comparison.  Perhaps  even  Be- 
wick's best  had  done  so.  But  when  he  drew  in  white- 
line,  he  found  out  a  new  style  altogether,  and  invented 
engraving-on-'wood.  The  old  style  —  the  imitation  of 
copper  —  was  not  lost  or  abandoned;  the  engraver  could 
still  use  that  when  he  would  (though  Bewick  himself 
paid  little  or  no  heed  to  it)  :  but  the  new  method  gave 
him  a  power  unknown  before.  With  the  use  of  this  new 
power  engraving-on-wood  became   a   distinct  art. 

Observe  now  that  this  method  rules  throughout  the 
engravings  I  give  here  as  specimens  —  Plates  II,  III, 
IV,  and  also  in  tlie  cuts  on  pages  53,  81.  Do  not  at 
present  mind  about  their  merit  as  engravings.  Be  they 
never  so  bad,  they  may  serve  to  sufficiently  explain  what 
I  have  to  say.  They  are  all  in  white-line  :  without  any 
admixture  of  fac-simile  except  what  I  shall  presently 
note  in  one  of  them. 

The  method  employed  in  Plate  II  (the  white  line  on 
the  black,  which  is  all  the  engraving  there  is)  is  plain 
enough.      It  is  the   same   method  carried  out   in  the  rest. 

Notice  next  Plate  III  (the  good  grey  poet,  Walt  Whit- 
man) engraved   from  a   tinted  and   slightly  penciled  draw- 


46  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

ing  by  the  late  Edward  Skill.  In  the  lighter  portions 
of  the  beard  some  fac-simile  lines  will  be  seen  (you  will 
find  such  in  the  lightest  parts  of  most  wood-engravings)  ; 
but  with  that  exception  all  is  white-line.  The  edges  of 
the  beard  and  hair  arc  plainK- enough  seen  to  be  that; 
and  white  cross  lines  on  the  forehead  and  elsewhere  will 
be  easily  discovered  by  unprofessional  eyes  :  but  the 
whole  cut  (throughout,  save  the  few  lines  of  beard  before 
noted)  is  done  in  the  same  manner.  It  Is  the  white  line 
on  which  the  engraver  depended  for  iiis  drawing,  not  at- 
tending to  or  caring  for  or  thinking  of  any  particular 
black  line  to  be  retained  or  given  ;  it  was  with  the  white 
line  that  he  drew  and  defined  and  endeavored  to  express 
everything,  whether  the  modeling  of  the  features,  the  tex- 
ture of  the  coat,  or  the  mere  color  in  the  tint  behind. 

Now  look  at  Plate  IV"  (from  Bryant's  Flood  of  Tears). 
Drawn  and  engraved  by  me,  it  is  very  likely  "  feeble  and 
monotonous "  ;  but  as  the  draughtsman  I  may  know 
whether  my  engraving  reproduced  the  drawing.  There 
again  (which  is  all  I  care  to  maintain  at  present)  all  is 
white-line.  The  drawing  was,  like  the  Whitman,  nearly 
all  tint,  with  only  a  few  pencil  outlines  of  the  flowers. 
The  flowers,  grass,  trees,  are  all  drawn  in  white-line  by 
the  graver.  The  falling  water  is  the  same.  So  far  will 
be  seen  at  once.  But  the  engraver  will  also  see  that  the 
level  water,  the  distance,  and  the  sky,  are  cut  in  the  same 


Plate  III. 


Plate  IV 


WHITE-LINE 


47 


way.  Dislike  the  design,  wish  it  were  more  forcible  or 
definite  (not  aware  that  the  dreamy  indistinctness  is  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  poet's  words),  be  quite  certain  that  it 
is  very  badly  engraved,  —  all  that  as  may  please  you, 
gentle  reader  or  Reviewer  !  What  I  want  you  to  see 
now  is  that  it  is  drawn  with  the  graver,  and  to  under- 
stand that  tliis   is    properly  ivhite-line.     The  cut  below, 


48  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

as  opposite  to  these,  —  though  my  Reviewer  may  not 
see  the  difference  and  may  think  it  no  worse  than  my 
chosen  specimens  of  good  engraving,  —  is  given  in 
order  that  I  may  make  this  remark:  —  whether  good 
or  bad,  faihng  or  succeeding,  the  graver-work  in  my  own 
cuts  is  dra-jjii^  with  intention  and  design  ;  the  work 
in  this  other  is  without  design.  It  too  is  white-Hue 
work,  as  all  ivood-engraving  except  Jac-simile  must 
be:  but  the  white  lines  here  are  not  drawn.  The  prac- 
tised engraver  knew  that  certain  closeness  of  line,  or 
largeness  of  wood,  would  produce  certain  color,  and 
availed  himself  oi  that  knowledge  :  but  for  the  meaning 
of  each  particular  line  he  was  without  an  artist's  care  : 
so  that  he  has  only  filled  his  spaces  with  cut  or  left  lines ; 
fiiirly  keeping  the  general  effect  of  the  draughtsman,  but 
losing  the  form  and  meaning  in  which  the  value  of  the 
drawing,  what  mav  more  properly  be  called  the  dra-w- 
ijigt  consisted. 

In  direct  contrast  to  this,  notice  the  cut  at  page  69,  by 
Charlton  Nesbit,  a  pupil  of  Bewick,  and  the  engraver 
of  much  of  the  best  work  that  passes  under  the  name  of 
Bewick  ;  the  best  c??graver  of  the  Bewick  school,  though 
as  an  artist  far  inferior  to  his  master  and  to  Clennell. 
Printed  from  an  electrotype,  the  original  block  repeatedly 
used  and  much  worn,  the  fresh  beauty  of  th"b  block  is 
lost,  the  outer  lines  being  battered  to   pieces  :   still  it  may 


WHITE-LINE.  49 

serve  to  illustrate  my  point.  It  is  from  a  drawing  by 
Thurston,  the  figures  perhaps  drawn  ahnost  in  fac-simile. 
Compare  it  especially  with  Plate  I.  It  will  show  you  how 
hard  it  is  to  classify.  This  by  Ncsbit  is  —  except  of 
course  the  mere  outlines  —  all  -luhltc-line  xvot-k  \  and  yet 
Plate  I,  which  cannot  be  classed  except  as  fac-simile,  has 
(as  I  noted  before)  work  in  it  of  the  same  Thompson- 
like, Thurston-likc,  white-line  character.  It  is  indeed 
scarcely  possible,  except  in  purely  mechanical  work,  to 
avoid  that  "  inconceivable"  combination  of  the  two  styles. 

With  these  remarks  for  your  guidance,  go  now  and 
examine  for  yourself!  Whether  in  Scribner  or  Harper^ 
in  newspaper  or  book,  the  same  laws  and  limitations 
hold  good.  Lines  engraved  with  design  may  be  bad  or 
good,  according  to  the  artistic  intelligence  or  the  capacity 
of  the  engraver;  but  lines  engraved  without  design  —  that 
is,  meaningless  lines  —  are  certain  marks  of  unartistic 
engraving. 

There  is  of  course   a   question  of  degree. 

How  bold  or  how  fine  the  lines  should  be  in  an  engrav- 
ing from  a  washed  drawing  is  reserved  for  the  judgment 
of  the  engraver,  depending  in  some  respect  on  the  jjur- 
pose  for  which  the  engraving  is  to  be  used,  and  the  care 
to  be  given  in  printing  it.  There  would  be  no  advan- 
tage in  "  fine"  work  where  the  printing  had  to  be  hur- 
ried or  without  care  and  best  materials.  One  would  not 
4 


50  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

have  the  work  in  Harper's  MontJily  Magazine  so  bold  as 
that  in  the  ^Vcckly  Ne~jcspapei'.  Yet  the  bolder  work 
might  be,  and  sliould  be,  as  artistic  as  the  minuter  and 
less  bold  (called  finer).  Also  it  may  be  left  entirely  to 
the  engraver's  judgment  —  overriding  even  the  opinion 
of  an  art-student — to  decide  what  kind  or  kinds  of  line 
may  be  most  fitting  to  represent  his  subject.  On  such 
points  opinions  and  tastes  may  differ.  But  on  one  point 
there  is  no  room  for  variance  of  opinion  :  that  every  line 
should  sho"v  design :  "joithout  which  the  work  is  not 
ivork  oj"  Art. 

And  here  to  say  something  of  variety  and  purpose  of 
line.  Scribncr'^s  Reviewer  continually  repeats  the  word 
lcgitii?iatc  as  mine,  and  as  representing  my  bigoted  ad- 
herence to  some  indefinite  conventional  system  of  line. 
I  have  never  anywhere  used  the  word,  having  no  respect 
for  its  meaning.  Nor  have  I  ever  (as  the  Boston  Post 
asserts)  "  taken  the  ground  that  there  is  only  one  way  to 
attain  satisfactory  results."  An  aitist  has  the  right  to 
make  any  experiments.  All  roads  are  right  that  will 
lead  him  to  the  Eternal  City.  Go  your  own  way,  my 
boy !  Onh'  when  you  find  yourself  on  the  direct  road  to 
Jericho,  with  your  back  toward  Rome,  it  may  be  well 
to  turn.  The  right  to  prove  all  things,  only  holding  fast 
to  what  is  good  (a  right  I  have  cared  to  exercise  as 
much  as  most  men),    shuts  the   word  legitimate  out  of 


WHITE-LINE  51 

my  vocabulary.  There  are  however  foolish  experiments : 
there  is  also  the  folly  of  repeating  experiments  already 
tried  and  found  worthless,  or  of  persisting  in  what  zvas 
experiment  till  it  becomes  a  7iianner  —  of  which  in  art 
there  is  always  a  dangerous   likelihood. 

Something  has  to  be  said  in  defence  of  what  is  called 
conventional.  It  is  not  enough  to  sneer  at  it  as  "  sacred 
common-place"  while  bowing  down  with  trembling  ado- 
ration before  the  young  Conceit  that  would  rule  in  its 
stead.  Grammar  is  but  conventional :  based  however 
on  certain  laws  of  language,  studied  and  known  to  some 
extent,  if  not  absolutely  determined.  The  laws  of  poetry- 
are  conventional.  Men  may  eccentrically  escape  from 
them  ;  but  it  is  not  given  to  every  one  to  invent  a  new 
rhytiimic  system.  And  so  though  I  or  any  other  en- 
graver may  be  free  to  try  any  experiments  in  line,  it 
may  not  be  certain,  is  not  perhaps  likely,  that  we  shall 
altogether  supersede  the  collective  results  of  the  many 
quite  as  clever  experimenters  whose  rules — I  will  not 
say  laws  —  have  been  codihed  for  our  restriction.  The 
traditions  of  an  earlier  time,  the  records  of  others'  oj^in- 
ions,  have  some  worth  in  them  whatever  the  acknowl- 
edged right  of  individual  conscience.  It  is  not  by  ig- 
noring the  past  that  the  world  progresses. 

Certain  conventional  lines  in  engraving,  invented  before 
Timotheus  Cole  was,  even  before  the  fossil  era  of  W.  J. 


52  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

Linton,  and  adopted  because  they  were  found  to  be  ex- 
pressive, may  yet  be  valuable.  A  curved  line  will  better 
represent  roundness  than  a  straight  line  can ;  a  rough 
line  will  help  to  distinguish  a  rough  surface  ;  a  perpen- 
dicular line  may  not  be  so  suitable  for  water  as  a  hori- 
zontal line,  unless  indeed  it  be  falling  water.  I  perhaps 
would  not  cut  Niagara  Falls  with  a  horizontal  line ; 
albeit,  "sacredly  common-place,"  "bigoted,"  and  "conserv- 
ative" as  I  am,  I  myself  have  tried  some  curious  experi- 
ments. If  you  were  drawing  waves  with  a  pencil  you 
would  naturally  follow  in  some  measure  their  flow^  and 
form  :  that  is  if  you  had  perceived  so  much.  If  you 
were  drawing  with  chalk  or  pencil  a  hand  or  face,  you 
would  find  yourself  soon  imitating  the  roundness  of  a 
projecting  part  or  hollow  with  corresponding  curved 
lines.  Your  mere  thought  of  the  form,  your  first  attempt 
at  outlining  it,  dictates  the  after  course  ;  and  the  law  that 
governs  such  almost  instinctive  action  is  at  the  base  of 
all  good  lining  for  engraving.  The  man  who  cannot  see 
the  beauty  and  propriety  of  this  harmonious  identifica- 
tion of  work  with  its  subject,  who  sees  no  beauty  in 
line,  ay  !  even  in  mere  regularity  and  the  pleasant  accord- 
ance of  lines  one  with  another,  is  not  an  artist,  can  never 
become  a  first-rate  engraver,  and  is  as  unfitted  to  give  an 
opinion  on  engraving  as  a  man  color-blind  to  judge  of 
painting. 


WHITE-I.INE 


53 


Unfitted  to  judge  it  as  engraving.  A  painter  may  be 
a  good  painter  and  yet  not  educated  in  engraving.  He 
may  be  content  to  see  his  picture  represented  with  a  cer- 
tain uncouth  or  bare  literal  fidelity,  because  either  lie  is 
afraid  of  his  engraver,  or  he  is  careless  of  the  graces  of 
engraving,  or  he  is  not  aware  that  anything  better  can 
be  done.  He  has  a  perfect  right  to  say,  "  That  satisfies 
me  ;  "  but  is  not  therefore  necessarily  competent  to  judge 
of  the  merits  of  "  that  "  as  an  engraving.  He  does  not 
call  a  photograph  art,  however  closely  it  may  repeat  his 
work  ;  and  he  may  mistake  when  he  thinks  the  engraved 
copy  of  his  picture  to  be  art  instead  of  tolcrablv  success- 
ful  mechanism. 

We  have  already  crossed  the  threshold  of  that  vexa- 
tious question  — What  is  art  in  engraving,  and  how  to 
be  known  from  what  is  only  mechanical? 


MECHANISM   AND   ART 

SAYS  the  aesthetic  young  man  of  the  Times,  preparing 
the  way  before  hhnself  or  Dr.  Holland  for  the  repe- 
tition in  Sa-ibncr  ol  his  Tunes  argument  —  ''The  proof 
of  the  pudding  is  in  the  eating";  look  at  our  cuts  in 
our  June  number,  and  see  how  decidedly  they  refute  Mr. 
Linton's  criticism  of  the  cuts  in  former  numbers !  Ex- 
ultingly  he  points  to  the  later  work,  which  he  pronounces 
excellent:  because  "we  perceive  at  once"  that  one  (Ved- 
der's  Marsyas)  "was  from  a  drawing";  another  (Cha- 
pu's  Gratitude')  "gives  the  feeling  of  bronze "  ;  a  third 
(Dubois'  Charity)  "tells  us  immediately  that  the  original 
was  plaister  or  clay  "  ;  and  a  fourth  (from  a  pen-and-ink 
sketch  by  St.  Gaudens  after  Dubois'  statue  of  Faith)  is 
"  faithfully  reproduced  "  so  that  it  cannot  be  mistaken  for 
anything  except  pen-and-ink.  This,  says  our  young  man, 
authoritatively    summing    up,   "  is    realism,"    and    (rather 

54 


MECHANISM    AND    ART 


55 


inconsequently)  ''  idealism  may  be  better  on  general  prin- 
ciples. But  it  is  all  very  well  to  talk  of  the  ideal  en- 
gravers. Where  are  they?"  Also,  "  artists  have  an 
unaccountable  dislike  to  free  translation."  And  further, 
not  quite  complimentarily  to  the  magazine  he  is  paid  to 
praise,  — "  Why  make  such  a  pother  over  magazine 
illustrations.?  It  is  absurd  to  clamor  about  high  art  over 
the  wood-cuts  of  the  monthly  press.  .  .  .  The  magazines 
are  mediums  for  experiments."  lu  corpore  vili^  etc. 
Swallow  then  your  Scribncr  '•'■  pudding,"  which  is  experi- 
mental and  not  high  art ;  and  be  grateful  for  new  "  pro- 
gressive "  methods  of  reproducing  clay  and  plaister,  char- 
coal and  pen-and-ink  ! 

What  does  the  reader  learn  from  this,  which  is  a  fair 
statement  of  the  Times  argument.?  On  my  honor  as  an 
encrraver,  I  can  get  nothing  out  of  it  except  the  suspicion 
that  the  young  man  was  ignorantly  —  mixed.  If  it  means 
anything,  it  would  seem  to  be  this  :  that  Scribfier  must  not 
be  looked  to  for  high-art ;  and  that,  owing  to  the  unac- 
countable dislike  cf  artists  to  free  translation  and  the 
paucity  of  ideal  engravers,  the  make-shift  of  what  he  mis- 
calls realism  is  to  be  put  up  with  as  the  best  we  can  get. 
"Call  you  this  backing  of  your  friends?"  If  he  means 
so  much  — I  find  nothing  else  under  his  verbiage  —  he  is 
not  of  much  service  to  his  patrons.  But  let  him  go, 
while  we  consider  this  "  realism,"  which  also  he  names 


56  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

"  impressionism,"  the  best  to  be  had  now,  when  artists 
have  such  dislikes  and  engravers  are  so  scarce. 

The  Vedder  (indeed  a  very  excellent  cut)  might,  for 
all  an  engraver  could  tell  (but  your  critic  sees  through 
millstones),  have  been  engraved  from  a  photograph;  the 
"  bronze  "  drapery  on  the  figures  in  the  Chapu  is  as  like 
glazed  calico  —  brown  calico  —  as  bronze;  the  Charity 
(I  speak  charital)lv)  might  have  been  cast  in  sugar  in- 
stead of  plaister,  or  modeled  in  cheese  instead  of  clay,  — 
being  as  like  to  any  one  material  as  to  the  other ;  and  the 
St.  Gaudens,  —  i'faith,  having  lost  most  of  "the  feeling" 
of  the  original  pen-and-ink  by  reduction,  has  had  all  re- 
maining likeness  cut  out  of  it  by  the  engraver.  This  is 
"  realism  "  or  "  impressionism."  O  tetnpora  !  O  mores  ! 
O  young  man  of  the  Times!  O  wonderful  experimen- 
tal  realistic  methods  ! 

Yet  let  us  for  a  moment  suppose  that  my  adverse 
criticism  is  unjust :  that  bronze  and  clay  and  pencil  and 
charcoal  and  i:)en-and-ink  are  as  accurately  represented 
as  the  7>»?c5  assumes.  What  then?  What  is  your  first 
object  in  looking  at  an  engraving  of  a  statue?  Is  it  to 
know  that  the  particular  original  of  the  engraving  was 
the  clay  or  marble,  or  a  pen-and-ink  sketch?  Or  is  it 
to  obtain  some  idea  of  the  beauty  of  the  statue?  If  in 
the  engraving  Jeanne  d'Arc  has  a  claw  instead  of  a  hand, 
will  you   be   better    satisfied   for  being    told    that  —  "the 


MECHANISM    AND    ART  57 

engraving  faitlit'ully  reproduces  tlie  texture  of  the  clay 
in  which  the  sculptor  had  niotleled  "  —  not  a  claw,  but 
a  hand?  Is  this  realism?  Do  you  care  to  have  the  feel- 
ing of  bronze  if  you  get  no  feeling  of  the  statue?  Is  this 
"impressionism"?  I  take  realism  to  mean  sometb.ing 
true,  not  a  fLiIsehood.  The  impression  I  desire  to  have  is 
of  the  essential,  not  of  an  accident.  What  care  I  whether 
the  Marsyas  was  engraved  from  a  drawing  by  Vcdder's 
own  hand,  or  from  a  drawing  by  some  one  else,  or  from 
a  photograph,  if  I  have  a  trustworthy  representation  of 
the  picture?  If  Mr.  Cole's  cut  contents  me,  shall  I  like 
it  better  for  being  told  that  the  critic  "can  perceive"  it 
is  from  a  drawing;  or  would  it  be  any  more  or  less  to 
my  liking  if  I  could  myself  perceive  that  curious  but  un- 
important phenomenon  of  critical  apprehension?  What 
is  it  to  me  if  I  get  a  tolerable  representation  of  Mr. 
Dubois'  Faith,  whether  Mr.  St.  Gaudens  sketched  it  in 
pen-and-ink,  or  somebody  else  in  charcoal  or  guache? 
You  might  as  well  expect  me  to  be  interested  in  the  in- 
formation that  Mr.  St.  Gaudens  wore  an  olive-colored 
blouse  and  smoked  so  many  cigars  during  his  pen-and- 
ink  performance.  Whether  you  call  this  realism  or  im- 
pressionism, it  is  not  Art. 

But  w^e  have  "  secured  entirely  new  efl'ects  !  "  "  In 
these  has  lived  the  charm  of  the  engravings  of  Scribner's 
Magazine"  —  I    pause    to    say    emphatically,    I    do    not 


58  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

choose  Scribncrs  Magazine  as  a  target.  With  the 
Scribner  firm  my  relations  have  never  been  other  than 
friendly  ;  nor  have  I  any  imfriendly  feelings  now.  My 
first  important  work  in  this  country  was  for  them  —  Dr. 
Holland's  Kathriiia;  and  no  one  is  more  earnest  than 
myself  in  according  to  the  author  of  Kathrina  and  his 
coadjutors  full  credit  for  the  enterprise  and  liberality  which 
have  made  the  history  of  Scribner's  Mojithly  remarka- 
ble among  magazines.  All  this  I  gladly  admit:  but  it 
is  no  reason  why  I  should  not  condemn  editorial  falla- 
cies in  art  matters  ;  nor  why  I  should  refrain  from  point- 
ing out  —  not  "picking"  out  —  the  growing  faults  which, 
to  my  thinking,  are  in  the  way  of  continued  success. 

I  do  not  choose  it  as  a  target.  It  is  not  my  fault  that 
in  Scrib?zcr  I  found  the  Cole  heads,  that  in  Scribnei-  I 
now  read  the  defence  —  say  rather  the  indiscriminate 
eulogy  of  this  pretentious  "  realism."  And  when  I  con- 
trasted certain  cuts  in  Harper  with  others  in  Scribner^ 
it  surely  was  not  to  pit  the  magazines  against  each  other, 
but  because  at  the  time  of  my  writing  I  there  most  readily 
found  the  contrast,  a  contrast  which  in  the  interest  of  Art 
I  had  to  notice.  After  which  acknowledgment,  I  must 
even  go  back  to  have  another  gird  at   Scribtter. 

New  effects  have  there  been  secured,  chiefly  by  the  aid 
of  photography  :  such  as  "  the  effect  of  a  charcoal  draw- 
ing " —  impossible  to  be  produced  "by  what  Mr.  Linton 


MECHANISM    AND    ART  59 

regards  as  legitimate  line-engraving;"  "the  reproduction 
of  a  drawing  in  pencil"  —  the  "  raciness  and  character" 
of  which  Mr.  Linton's  line  would  utterly  have  spoiled. 
Another  cut  "  tells  the  simple  truth  as  it  is  in  clay." 
Then  there  is  a  picture  in  which  "  the  attempt  is  made 
to  reproduce  the  effect  of  a  work  mostly  done  in  washes." 
This  last  a  most  remarkable  novelty  ! 

It  all  reads  sadly  like  the  patter  of  an  amateur.  Still, 
for  conscience'  sake,  to  deal  quite  fairly,  I  turn  back  to 
the  February  number,  to  see  if  I  have  not  been  mistak- 
ing. Honestly,  with  hard  endeavor  I  cannot  see  anything 
like  clay,  or  charcoal,  or  pencil,  or  washes,  in  the  speci- 
mens referred  to.  The  pencil-likeness  I  may  miss  from 
not  knowing  exactly  in  what  the  "raciness"  of  pencil 
consists.  But  I  have  tried  earnestly  to  see  the  declared 
merits.  I  would  not  have  minded  seeing  them  :  for  it 
wonld  not  have  affected  my  argument  that  all  these  ac- 
complishments would  be  worth  next  to  nothing.  Even 
the  great  Wyatt-Eaton  portraits,  in  which  the  Sun  tells 
me  the  "peculiar  quality  of  crayon-work"  was  reproduced 
by  Mr.  Cole  with  such  "  wonderful  fidelity"  —  "and  his 
treatment  of  it  was  really  marvelous,"  failed  to  impress 
me  as  being  particularly  like  crayon-work.  They  looked 
to  me  more  like  bad  lithographs,  with  a  machine-iuled 
tint  behind  some.  I  own  however  that  Mr.  Cole  did  full 
justice  to  those  "  indifferently  executed  portraits"  {Sun), 


60  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

though  with  "more  fine  engraving"  (not  good  because 
fine)  "  than  artistic  effect,  but  that  was  tlie  fault  of  the 
artist,  and  not  of  the  engraver"  {Sun  again).  Wiiy 
again  "sit  down  upon"  Mr.  Cole.?  Because  already  he 
has  been  bettered  by  my  prescription.  At  least  he  knows 
now  the  nature  of  his  malady  ;  and  though  he  may  yet  for 
a  while,  like  Naaman,  bow  down  in  the  house  of  Rimmon, 
I  think  he  may  be  cured  of  his  leprosy  and  that  it  will  not 
cleave  to  him  for  ever.  In  his  last  portrait,  of  Whittier 
i^Scribner^  August),  is  great  improvement.  There  is  good 
lining  on  the  face,  and  the  face  is  not  hairy.  There  is 
indeed  the  same  error  of  extreme  fineness,  in  which  I 
suppose  he  is  ordered  to  persist ;  and  this  mars  the  clear- 
ness of  the  engraving,  giving  it  the  appeai'ance  of  a 
worn-out  steel-plate  instead  of  the  "  marvelous  crayon- 
work "  of  former  heads.  Any  way,  it  is  an  improvement. 
Notwithstanding  his  "noble  simplicity,"  his  "outlines," 
and  his  "  purists,"  the  Natiort  Critic  has  some  inkling  of 
the  truth  of  my  animadversions  here  :  for  "  the  opinions 
of  this  join'nal  in  art-matters  have  always  been  based 
upon  the  constant  reiteration  of  the  importance  —  the  ne- 
cessity of  developing  each  art  in  its  own  native  direction. 
Thin  iron  cornices  that  simulate  cut  stone,  lithography 
that  tries  to  pass  for  painting,  nvood-cuts  that  ape  the 
graces  of  other  arts,  are  all  an  offence  to  us,  and  are 
to  be  characterized  as  not  art  at  all  in  the  true  sense" 


MECHANISM    AND    ART  61 

Good  for  the  Nation  I  Saul  has  actually  slipped  in  among 
the  prophets.  "  Wood-cuts  that  ape  the  graces  of  other 
arts,"  that  imitate  worn-out  copper-plate  and  bad  litho- 
graphy (hardly  to  be  considered  graces),  that  ape  the 
graces  of  pencil  and  pen-and-ink,  crayon  and  charcoal 
and  washed  tints,  not  to  speak  of  clay  and  bronze  and 
marble,  "  are  to  be  characterized  as  not  art  at  all  in  the 
true  se7ise.''     I  am   glad   to  get  so   mucli   corroboration. 

Yet  another  word.  If  you  did  secure  these  marvelous 
effects  which  tell  the  critical  studeitt  ''  of  the  truth  as  it 
is  in  clay,"  or  give  him  something  else  to  be  immediately 
perceived  by  him,  what  good  is  it  when  the  public  cannot 
see  them.?  Like  that  famous  relic,  the  single  hair  of  the 
Saint  which  he  wlio  showed  saw  not,  are  the  "  marvel- 
ous effects "  of  your  show-man.  The  effects  are  not 
there.  A  pencil-drawing  cannot  be  reproduced  to  de- 
ceive any  one  who  knows  what  pencil-drawing  is.  The 
beauty  peculiar  to  it  is  in  the  greyness  of  its  lines:  in 
your  mock-pencil  the  lines  are  all  black.  You  lighten 
them  by  dotting:  but  the  pencil  does  not  make  dotted 
lines.  The  same  witli  charcoal  or  crayon.  There  is  no 
mistaking  an  engraving  for  either,  except  by  a  critical 
art-student,  the  Reviewer  who  always  sees  what  lie  wants 
to  see.  It  is  mainly  through  the  interference  of  these 
amateurs  without  understanding  that  the  generally  more 
correct  instinct  of  the  uneducated  is  perverted. 


62  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

The  great  mischief  of  all  this  clay  and  charcoal  rub- 
bish is  that  the  public  is  taught  to  value  the  non-essential 
more  than  the  essential,  and  the  young  artist,  finding  a 
readier  market  that  way,  gets  to  care  chiefly  for  astonish- 
ing the  world  with  his  "  marvelous "  puerilities.  All 
which  is  a  symptom  of  decadence  in  Art,  not  a  sign  of 
growth.  Allowed  the  full  merit  of  mechanical  or  merely 
technical  excellence,  allowed  also  that  these  experiments 
may  be  good  schooling  yor  the  hand^  what  avails  all  that 
if  you  lose  sight  even  of  what  Art  is?  The  Nation  critic 
thinks  he  sees  in  this  idolatrous  adoration  of  the  Mechan- 
ical a  tendency  ''  to  work  back  "  to  the  worship  of  true 
Art.  There  may  be  a  tendency  through  falsehood  to  re- 
action ;  but  meanwhile  the  working  backwards  is  not 
exactly  progressive. 

After  all  I  may  be  wrong,  blinded  by  age  and  preju- 
dice to  the  worth  of  these  peculiar  specimens ;  they  may, 
despite  mv  judgment  to  the  contrar}',  be  very  perfect  im- 
itations of  rac}'  pencil-work,  and  of  that  novel  style  of 
drawing  in  washes,  lying  dormant  all  these  eighty  years 
since  Bewick.  I  surely  dream  when  I  suppose  that  I 
have  seen  washed  drawings  even  before  they  could  be 
photographed  on  the  wood  for  the  sake  of  3'et  closer 
verisimilitude  than  could  be  had  by  putting  them  directly 
on  the  wood.  Let  me  wake  up  and  accept  the  new  phase 
of   realism,    the    worship   of  the    Unessential.       Whither 


MECHANISM    AND    ART  63 

leads  it?  Having  settled  that  the  clay  is  of  more  impor- 
tance than  the  statue,  and  the  charcoal  than  the  drawing, 
we  proceed  to  represent  —  reproduce  is  the  more  definite 
realistic  word  —  an  impression  of  the  paper  or  other 
material  on  which  the  artist  made  his  drawing.  The 
photograph  secures  for  us  another  new  effect.  The 
artist  had  drawn  upon  a  piece  of  grey  paper.  We  re- 
produce the  appearance  of  grey  paper  by  a  square  ot 
fine  tint  behind  a  fac-simile  drawing.  With  that  is  the 
additional  advantage  that  we  can  "  engrave  white  paint." 
Or  the  artist  had  nailed  his  paper  up  by  the  four  cor- 
ners ;  and  we  engrave  a  "  marvelously  faithful "  reproduc- 
tion of  the  four  nails,  —  more  than  that,  even  a  turned- 
down  corner  of  the  paper.  Most  interesting  !  We  frame 
a  cut  with  a  broad  border,  to  show  that  the  original  was 
mounted  ;  or  as  the  picture  when  photographed  happened 
to  stand  against  a  tree  or  on  the  artist's  color-box,  we 
have  tree  and  color-box,  perhaps  also  an  umbrella  or  ar- 
tistic wide-awake,  all  reproduced,  not  with  any  relation 
to  the  subject,  but  with  a  wonderful  fidelity.  For  speci- 
mens this  time,  see  Harper's  Monthly  for  August.  That 
is  what  the  peculiar  effects  are  leading  us  to  in  Art. 
There  is  no  Art  but  only  Artifice  —  Trick  in  all  of  it. 
Very  pretty  perhaps!  There  is  no  reason  why  your 
magazine  cuts  (on  the  theory  of  the  Times,  that  they  are 
not  to   be   expected  to  furnish    us  with  high   art)    should 


64  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

not  be  made  as  jDretty,  as  graceful,  as  attractive,  as  mere- 
tricious, as  salable,  as  possible.  There  are  more  pleased 
than  displeased  at  this  sort  of  girl-nonsense,  b)'  perhaps 
a  hundred  to  one  ;  and  the  publisher  is  not  to  be  asked 
to  prefer  Art  to  sale.  But  do  not  at  the  same  time  brag 
of  what  you  are  doing  for  Art.  Such  things  are  not 
Art :  even  by  a  Nation' s  allowance. 

The  aim  of  Art  is  expression.  Wood-engraving  is  Art 
only  when  one  begins  to  draw  with  the  graver,  cutting 
a  determinate  line,  knowing  the  purpose  and  value  of 
it,  and  with  some  intention  of  expression.  Short  of  that 
the  best  and   most  elaborate  work  is  but  meclianism. 

For  which  reason  white-line  work  is  more  artistic  than 
fac-simile.     Thei"e  is  more  scope  for  the  graver. 

There  is  the  same  thing  in  drawing  or  painting.  The 
artistic  draughtsman  has  drawing  in  his  every  line  ;  the 
less  artistic,  or  he  who  cannot  draw,  fills  in  with  mean- 
ingless pencilings,  or  confusion.  There  is  a  kind  of 
mechanical  painting  too. 

The  aim  of  Art  is  expression  :  which  does  not  mean 
the  display  of  the  painter's  or  the  engraver's  eccentrici- 
ties. In  an  engraving  it  means:  —  in  the  first  place  at- 
tention to  form  and  drawing;  then  the  keeping  of  all 
parts  in  proper  relation  to  each  other ;  then  color  and 
efl'ect ;  then,  with  some  care  for  harmonious  direction  of 
lines,   texture  of  substances  ;    last  of  all    (whether   as  an 


MECHANISM    AND    ART  65 

artist  you  can  think  it  worth  while,  or  as  a  hired  worlc- 
man  you  are  obUged  to  please  your  employer)  the  "  im- 
itations" of  what  has  really  nothing  to  do  with  your 
engraving,  —  pencil,  charcoal,  lithography,  etc.  —  all  the 
little  monkey-tricks  which  may  help  to  astonish  the  mul- 
titude. The  fault  of  the  new  mechanical  school  is  that 
it  starts  at  the  wrong  end.  For  that  I  exclaim  against 
it.  Bring,  in  pompous  pi'ocession,  with  your  wooden 
aperies  borne  on  velvet  cushions  before  you,  with  bray- 
ing of  monthly,  weekly,  or  daily  trumpets,  etc.,  your 
little  offerings  of  anise  !  It  is  not  that  which  offends  me. 
But  when  you  block  up  the  porch  of  the  Temple  to 
proclaim  that  you  have  fulfilled  the  Law, — then,  it  may 
be  too  indignantly,  but  moved  by  no  personal  feeling, 
stirred  only  by  an  artist's  zeal  and  justifiable  wrath 
against  lies,  I  lift  my  voice  in  protest.  Personal  feel- 
ing !  What  docs  it  matter  to  me?  Perfect  yoin-selvcs 
in  mechanism  !  I  will  admire  your  ability.  Surely  I 
would  not  have  you  neglect  that.  Use  multiple  gra- 
vers, or  what  you  will  ;  cross  lines,  only  sometimes  con- 
sider the  direction  ;  try  your  most  whimsical  experi- 
ments!— your  hands  and  eyes  will  be  trained  thereby: 
but  do  not  forget  that  these  successes  arc  not  the  object 
of  Art.      Here  is  my  quarrel  with   the   "new  school." 

Which,  let  me  also  observe,  may  be  "  a  grand  inven- 
tion," but  is  not   original,  —  no,  not   even   excepting  the 


66  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

multiple  graver,  an  old  explosion.  All  these  experi- 
ments (save  that,  for  he  was  an  artist)  William  Harvey 
tried  some  fiftv  years  ago :  excessive  fineness,  cross- 
lining  (but  net  without  meaning  or  thought  of  beauty), 
varieties  of  texture,  etc.  His  great  work,  a  copy  of 
Haydon's  Dcntatus,  his  portrait  of  Johnson  the  printer 
(in  Johnson's  Typographia)  ^  show  more  wonderful  work, 
even  as  mechanism,  than  all  that  is  now  so  marveled  at 
of  the  Cole  and  Cross-line  series.  The  difference  is  in 
the  complacent  content  of  the  "  new  school "  with  merely 
ignoble  mechanism.  Harvey  was  seeking  what  new 
forces  and  appliances  he  could  press  into  the  service 
of  Art. 

This  however  is  not  defining  the  difference  between 
Ari  and  Mechanism  in  the  engraving  itself.  To  begin 
with  a  short  definition: — mechanism  is  that  which  em- 
ploys only  the  hands  ;  art  needs  brains  as  well  as  hands. 
Art  is  expressive,  mechanism  inexpressive.  Lines  drawn 
with  a  graver,  iclth  design^  have  art  in  them,  of  however 
poor  a  quality  ;  lines  cut  without  a  sense  of  drawing, 
without  any  consciousness  of  meaning,  are  only  mechan- 
ical. Some  sense  of  appropriateness  of  line  will  come 
into  the  artist's  mind,  whether  he  be  conventionally  or 
experimentally  disposed,  because  he  will  cut  nothing 
without  thought  of  what  it  is  or  means ;  and  so  his  work 
will  vary  according  to  circumstances  and  according  to  his 


MECHANISM    AND    ART 


67 


ability  to  be  more  or  less  expressive.  It  has  been  said 
that  a  good  engraver  can  make  a  good  cut  of  an  indiffer- 
ent drawing.  That  is  true :  also  a  poor  engraver  can 
make  a  good-looking  cut  of  a  good  drawing.  He  need 
only  be  moderately  faithful  to  the  color  drawn,  and  though 
his  sky  except  from  its  position  could  not  be  distinguished 
from  the  water  or  the  ground,  though  he  has  but  one 
mechanical  and  most  conventional  line  serving  for  every- 
thing, the  drawing  will  keep  him  in  his  place,  and  the 
cut  may  look  to  the  careless  observer  like  fine  work.  In 
truth  the  public  cares  for  little  more.  The  broad  effect 
satisfies  ;  and  whoso  knows  nothing  of  what  art  is  can- 
not feel  its  want.  Here  is  our  difficulty.  So  long  as 
the  public  admire  —  and  admiring  buy  —  why  should  the 
publisher  or  the  engraver  care  to  improve?  Fortunately 
the  spur  of  competition  touches  the  flanks  of  the  most 
satisfied. 

Would  you,  dear  and  attentive  reader!  care  to  educate 
yourself  so  as  to  know  a  good  engraving  from  a  poor 
one,  follow  these  simple  rules!  Do  not  be  beguiled  by 
the  first  look  and  appearance  of  the  cut  before  you ! 
Your  premature  satisfaction  may  be  partly  owing  to  the 
pleasantness  of  the  subject,  and  else  to  the  cunning  of 
the  draughtsman,  who  knew  how  to  make  a  good  and 
effective  drawmg  which  not  even  the  engraver  could  de- 
stroy.    That  nice  engraving  may  be  very  badly  engraved. 


68  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

Examine  it !  Do  you  find  any  marks  of  intelligence  in 
it?  If  a  landscape,  does  the  engraver  appear  to  have 
had  any  notion  of  the  growth  of  a  tree,  the  formation  of 
a  mountain,  the  roundness  and  lightness  of  a  cloud,  etc.? 
Or  is  it  all  one  flat  unvarying  set  of  monotonous  un- 
meaning lines,  so  that  the  treatment  of  one  part  would 
do  just  as  well  for  any  other  part  ?  In  the  first  case  you 
have  an  artist's  work  ;  in  the  second  a  mechanic's.  If 
the  engraving  is  a  figure-subject,  a  portrait,  a  statue,  you 
will  not  be  taken  in  by  a  pleasant  and  never  so  pretty 
arrangement  of  lights  and  shadows  (that  again  is  due 
to  the  draughtsman)  ;  but  your  eyes  will  inquire  if  the 
engraver  seemed  to  understand  the  drawing  of  the  figure, 
if  he  seemed  to  know  anything  of  form,  and  how  to  ex- 
press the  same  with  line  as  well  as  liglit  and  shade. 
Such  things  mark  the  artist.  If  you  can  find  no  trace 
of  this  knowledge,  if  you  find  hands  and  feet,  etc., 
badly  drawn,  perspective  not  attended  to  nor  distances 
kept,  texture  of  materials  everywhere  alike,  the  lines  in 
unpleasant  opposition :  that  is  only  mechanic's  work. 
These  rules  will  not  make  you  a  judge  of  engraving. 
Time  and  study  are  needed.  But  the  thought  so  bred 
in  you  will  help  you  toward  judgment ;  and  if  some- 
times you  have  the  fortune  to  meet  with  works  of  ap- 
proved worth  which  you  can  compare  with  what  you 
think  good,   the  sight   of   what    the  best  is  will  be  new 


MECHANISM    AND    ART 


69 


teaching;  and  yoii  will  learn  in  time.  The  one  clue  to 
guide  you  out  of  the  labyrinth  of  erroneous  judgments  is 
the  constant  recollection  of  the  meaning  of  expressive- 
ness. As  before  said,  expressive  work  is  artistic,  inex- 
pressive is  mechanical.  My  teaching  can  go  no  further. 
And  need  I  say  again,  even  when  you  distrust  your- 
self, place  no  faith  in  anonymous  Reviewers !  Distrust 
of  the  Anonymous  might  be  useful  in  other  matters  be- 
side Engravinsf  on   Wood. 


PHOTOGRAPHY    ON   WOOD 

A  CONSIDERABLE  amount  of  ignorance  is  afloat 
concerning  the  use  of  photography  on  wood,  as 
used  instead  of  drawing.  Its  advantages,  or  disadvan- 
tages, are  so  little  known  that  it  may  be  worth  while 
to   give    it    some  attention. 

Savs  that  luminous  art-meteor,  the  Si/ii :  —  "  To  pho- 
tography on  wood  we  owe  the  improved  character  of 
our  wood-engraving  more  than  to  any  other  cause." 
And  all  we  gain  from  it  is  set  forth  at  length,  as  fol- 
lows :  — 

"  Of  course  this  method  (of  photography)  admits  of 
the  reduction  of  a  drawing  to  a  block  of  any  desired 
size.  Another  advantage  is  that  it  enables  the  engraver 
to  have  the  original  drawing  always  in  front  of  him  to 
refer  to,  and  that  he  is  not  at  any  time  exposed  to  the 
danger  of  going  wrong  in  his  effects,  by  reason  of  not 
having  something   to  refer  to  for  the  general  effect  that 

70 


PHOTOGRAIMIY    ON    WOOD  71 

it  was  contemplated  to  attain.  It  also  does  away  with 
the  possibility  of  the  design  being  lost  by  an  accident  to 
the  surface  of  the  block  while  the  engraver  is  at  work  at 
it,  and  it  has  the  very  salutary  effect  of  making  the  en- 
graver responsible  to  the  artist  for  the  etlect  he  attains. 
Before  photography  upon  wood  was  adopted  an  engraver 
could  say,  when  confronted  with  defects  in  his  block, 
'Well,  what  can  I  do.?  Your  artist  drew  it  so.'  Even 
now,  art-editors  who  give  out  drawings  uport  the  wood 
take  the  precaution  to  make  ferrotypes  or  negatives  of 
them,  so  as  to  hold  the  engraver  to  account  if  his  work 
be  unfaithful.  It  used  to  be  that  artists  would  go  wild 
over  the  engravings  that  were  shown  tlicm  as  represent- 
ing what  tiiey  had  put  on  the  wood  with  such  care.  The 
imperturbable  engraver  could  always  turn  upon  them 
with  placid  irresponsibility  and  tell  them  their  drawing 
was  at  fault." 

Further  :  —  "  As  an  engraver  goes  over  the  surface  of 
his  block,  he  destroys  the  drawing  by  transforming  it  into 
lines,  whicli  arc  actually  meaningless  and  invisible  until 
he  blackens  them  with  his  lead  pencil  or  ink-dabber. 
He  has  to  depend  too  much  on  his  memory,  and  he 
invariably  loses,  and  incurs  the  danger  of  substituting  his 
own  ideas  for  those  of  the  artist.  With  tiic  design  pho- 
tographed upon  the  wood,  he  has  constantly  before  him 
the   artist's  work,  and  is  really  elevated,  in  a  measure,  to 


72  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

the  position  of  an  interpreter  of  it,  or  translator  of  it  into 
a  new  medium.  It  is  in  this  sort  of  inspiration  of  the 
eno-raver  that  the  chief  provocation  to  excellent  woi'k 
lies,  because  it  conceals  the  mechanical  aspect  of  his 
function  as  much  as  possible,  and  brings  him  into 
a  more  intimate  and  sympathetic  relation  with  the 
artist,"  etc. 

And  in  Scribiier  we  find  it  written:  —  "From  the 
moment  that  Scribner  began  to  avail  itself  of  the  art  of 
photographing  pictures  upon  the  wood  a  great  develop- 
ment took  place." 

From  which  we  are  to  be  led  to  infer  that  tlie  use  of 
photography  upon  wood  is  almost  if  not  quite  an  origi- 
nal enterprise  of  those  hardy  discoverers.  The  Sun 
writer  seems  implicitly  to  believe  it.  Far  however  is 
that  from  being  the  truth,  for  photographs  on  the  wood 
instead  of  drawings,  and  photographs  of  drawings-on- 
wood  for  the  sake  of  reference  and  comparison  with  the 
proof,  have  been  in  use  for  the  last  twenty  years  or 
more.  I  have  before  me  at  this  writing  photographs 
of  Sir  F.  Leighton's  illustrations  to  George  Eliot's  Ro- 
mola  in  the  early  numbers  of  the  Cornhill  Magazine^  — 
photographs  taken  from  Leighton's  own  drawings  on  the 
wood  :  with  which  I  doubt  not  he  compared  my  en- 
gravings, although  the  blocks  were  never  declined.  I 
have  similar  photographs  of  the  drawings  of  Noel  Paton, 


PHOTOGRAPHY    ON    WOOD  73 

Rossetti,  and  others,  sent  to  mc  in  those  days,  by  men 
who  chose  my  work,  to  prevent  me  from  cutting  "  the 
whole  soul  out  of  them."  Photographs  tipon  the  ivood 
were  in  use  also,  but  were  always  declined  by  me,  as  I 
should  decline  tliem  now.  They  do  not  suit  my  "  me- 
chanical function."  Only  in  one  instance,  retaining  the 
photograph  on  the  wood — a  reduction  of  a  drawing  by 
Dore,  I  copied  the  original  drawing  myself  in  prefer- 
ence to  cutting  the  photograph  ;  and  my  work  was  ap- 
proved by  the  painter  and  not  declined  by  the  publisher. 

Says  the  Sun:  —  "This  method  admits  of  the  reduc- 
tion of  a  drawing  to  a  block  of  any  desired  size."  Is 
this  would-be  critic  so  utterly  ignorant  of  the  subject  on 
which  he  pretends  to  give  instruction  as  not  to  know 
that  the  poorest  draughtsman  is  capable  of  correctlv  re- 
ducing a  drawing  to  any  desired  size,  without  the  aid 
of  photography?  Yet  he  assumes  here  to  be  showing 
the  advantage  of  photography. 

Says  the  Scribner  \x\^\.x\\z\.o\.,  reinforcing  his  confrere: 
"Drawing  upon  the  limited  surface  of  a  block  has  al- 
ways been  regarded  by  artists  as  a  cramped  business; 
the  freest  handling  is  not  attainable  that  zvay."  Is  it 
so  indeed?  Was  Holbein  cramped  when  he  drew  the 
Day  of  Judgment  on  a  block  three  inches  by  two  ?  Was 
Bewick  cramped  when  he  drew  pictures  worthy  of  Ho- 
garth,  on    his  few   inches  of   wood?       Or    was  Clennell 


74  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

cramped,  or  Thurston,  or  William  Harvey,  or  Thomas 
Landseer?  Was  the  freest  handling  not  attainable  that 
way  by  George  Cruikshank,  and  Seymour  (the  precursor 
of  PiincJi)^  and  Leech,  and  the  Doyles,  and  Tenniel,  and 
Thomas,  and  Walker,  and  Gilbert?  Did  the  greater 
painters  find  free  handling  unattainable :  Alaclise,  and 
Mulready,  and  Millais,  and  Noel  Paton,  and  Leighton, 
and  Pickersgill?  All  these  —  I  cannot  at  a  moment 
name  all  who  drew  directly  upon  the  block  —  found  no 
difficulty  in  freest  handling  ;  and  all  these  hi  line.  And 
in  landscape  —  washed  drawings,  I  can  recall  a  few: 
W.  L.  Leitch,  Duncan,  Dodgson,  nearly  all  the  water- 
color  men.  In  France  need  I  cite  more  than  Jacque 
(known  somewhat  as  an  etcher,  and  tolerably  free-hand- 
ed), and  Meissonier,  and  Grandville.  and  Tony  Johannot, 
and  Gavarni,  and  Dore?  Most  of  these  names  are  very 
likely  not  known  to  Scribner ;  but  one  sitting  in  the 
editorial  chair,  if  onl}^  pro  hdc  vice.,  should  have  learned 
his  alphabet  before  giving  lectures  upon  grammar.  Surely 
though,  he  must  have  thought  of  some  American  names 
while  announcing  that  impossibility  of  free  handling 
'•  upon  the  limited  surface  of  a  block."  Need  I  remind 
him  of  Darley,  and  Eytinge,  and  Mrs.  Foote,  and  Cole- 
man, and  Hennessy,  and  Homer,  and  Appleton  Brown, 
and  Waud,  and  Woodward,  and  Moran?  I  do  not  ex- 
haust the  catalogue,  naming  only  the  first  that  come  into 


PHOTOGRAPHY    ON    WOOD 


75 


my  mind.  Must  I  name  any  more  to  disprove  so  much 
of  the  assertion  in  Scribner  —  that  the  freest  handling 
is  not  attainable  o?z  the  limited  surface  of  a  block? 

Says  the  Sun:  —  "Another  advantage  (of  the  photo- 
graph on  the  zvood)  is  that  it  enables  the  engraver  to 
have  the  original  drawing  in  front  of  him  to  refer  to." 
Supposing  this  to  happen  occasionally,  one  may  yet 
^iik  —  What  is  the  advantage?  If  the  drawing  on  the 
wood  (say  the  copy  of  a  picture)  is  by  the  hand  of  a 
draughtsman,  what  is  to  prevent  the  same  advantage  of 
having  the  original  to  refer  to?  Ah!  says  the  'cute  Re- 
viewer—  "  but  the  original  itself  might  be  on  the  wood." 
Then  the  engraver  could  have  a  photograph  of  it  always 
"  in  front  of  him  to  refer  to."  The  Scribner  folks  them- 
selves could  have  told  their  Reviewer  that.  It  is  not 
many  weeks  since  they  sent  me  photographs  of  two 
drawings,  the  originals  being  on  the  wood.  And  truly, 
as  I  supposed  them  sent  for  me  to  refer  to,  I  had  to 
decide  whether  I  should  engrave  the  drawings  as  drawn, 
or  alter  them  to  the  likeness  of  the  photographs  —  which 
did  not  exactly  render  the  drawings. 

Then,  following  the  course  of  the  Sun,  —  having  the 
photograph  "  does  away  with  the  possibility  of  the  design 
being  lost  by  an  accident  to  the  surface  of  the  block  while 
the  engraver  is  at  work  at  it."  He  is  hard  put  to  it  for 
his   "  ad\  antages."       I    have    engiaved    and  have  known 


76  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

engravers  during  fifty  years,  and  I  do  not  recollect  such 
an  accident  occurring.  But  it  is  well  to  provide  for  pos- 
sibilities. 

And  then,  continues  he  :  —  "  As  an  engraver  goes  over 
the  surface  of  his  block,  he  destroys  the  drawing  by 
transforming  it  into  lines,  which  are  actually  meaning- 
less and  invisible  until  he  blackens  them  with  his  lead 
pencil  or  ink  dabber."  What  wicked  engraver's  lad  has 
been  laughing  on  this  occasion  ?  A.^  the  JVation  particu- 
larly observes,  "  it  is  not  given  to  every  man  to  be  a 
critic."  Thiit  was  meant  for  me,  not  for  his  brother  in 
the  Sii?z.  But  though  not  "  a  critic,"  I  may,  having 
been  brought  up  as  an  engraver,  be  qualified  to  speak 
of  the  processes  of  engraving  ;  and  I  have  to  contradict 
this  writer  upon  every  point  in  the  sentence  I  have  just 
quoted.  The  engraver  does  not  destroy  the  drawing  by 
transforming  it  into  lines  (though  were  it  a  fac-simile 
drawing  it  would  be  of  no  consequence  if  he  did).  A 
washed  dra-joiug^  \\\  which  alone  he  has  to  care  for 
effect,  is  as  well  seen  on  the  engraved  block,  and  on  every 
part  of  the  block  as  he  goes  on  with  his  "  transforming," 
as  it  was  before  he  touched  it.  You  cannot  indeed  de- 
strov  the  etlect  if  you  would.  Why  lines  should  necessa- 
rily be  meaningless  I  do  not  understand  ;  but  meaningless 
or  not,  they  are  not  invisible.  And  no  one  but  a  bung- 
ling apprentice  would  think  of  blackening  his  block  with 


PHOTOGRAPHY    ON   WOOD  77 

lead  pencil  at  any  time,  or  with  the  "  ink  dabber  "  till  the 
whole  was  finished.  Certainly  he  has  had  liis  lesson 
from  the  errand-boy,  who  has  led  him  astra}-.  He  goes 
as  wikl  as  his  friends  were  in  tlie  habit  of  going  before 
the  invention  of  photography  held  the  placid  -.md  \n-iper- 
turbable  engraver  to  account  —  '-in  the  days  of  the  wild 
artist  boys,  a  long  time  ago." 

But  now  —  happily  escaping  "the  danger  of  substi- 
tuting his  own  ideas,"  '*  with  the  design  photographed 
upon  the  wood,  he  has  constantly  before  him  the  artist's 
work,  and  is  really  elevated,  in  a  measure,  to  the  posi- 
tion of  an  interpreter,  or  translator  of  it  into  a  new 
medium.  It  is  in  this  sort  of  inspiration  of  the  engraver 
that  tlie  chief  provocation  to  excellent  work  lies,  because 
it  conceals  the  mechanical  aspect  of  his  function  as 
much  as  possible,  and  brings  him  into  a  more  intimate 
and  sympathetic  relation  with  the  artist."  Prodigious  1 
He  is  inspired  by  escaping  the  danger  of  ideas,  loses 
the  aspect  of  his  function,  and  so  is  provoked  into  excel- 
lence and  becomes  intimate  with  the  artist.  This  is 
being  elevated  in  a  measure  to  the  position  of  an  inter- 
preter, or  translator  of  it  into  a  new  medium.  It  is  bet- 
ter than  the  working  backwards  to  simplicity  of  our 
friend  in  the  Nation.  And  too  funny  to  be  treated  se- 
riously. 

The  real  history  of  photography-on-vvood  is  as  follows. 


78  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

My  friend  is  too  young  to  know  anything  about  it, 
except  from  some  otlier  Reviewer's  report,  which  I  as- 
sure him  is  not  to  be  depended  on.  I  will  tell  him  what 
I  know.  There  were  publishers  in  those  days  who  found 
photography  on  wood  cheaper  than  drawing :  also  I  will 
not  deny  that  some  of  them  may  have  'had  strange  mag- 
gots in  their  heads,  foolish  notions  of  securing  new  ef- 
fects, etc.  There  were  also  then  as  now  artists,  men  of 
name,  whose  works  (or  names)  were  wanted  ;  but  of 
these  men  some  could  not  draw  upon  the  wood.  Stan- 
field,  for  one,  could  not.  And  there  were  others  who, 
not  drawing  easily  or  well,  disliked  "  the  trouble,"  yet 
were  not  content  with  copies  by  the  usual  draughtsmen. 
So  photography  v^'as  tried  and,  such  reasons  weighing 
more  than  its  own  worth,  little  by  little  made  its  way. 
Cheapness  goes  far.  When  the  London  Graphic  was 
started  (was  it  before  Scribner's  Magazine?)  this  photo- 
graphing of  artists'  drawings  came  into  moi-e  general 
use.  Some  men  who  could  draw  saw  the  chance  for 
double  pay,  a  price  for  the  photographed  copy  from 
their  drawing  and  a  price  for  the  original  sold  elsewhere. 
The  publisher  saved  something ;  so  both  were  satisfied. 
Draughtsmen  were  thrown  over  and  engravers  were  sac- 
rificed. That  was  their  business.  I  never  heard  of  either 
draughtsman  or  engraver  preferring  a  photograph.  Here 
is  the  whole  story.     And  if  we  were  to  say  that  painters 


PHOTOGRAPHY    ON    WOOD  79 

cannot  draw,  nor  draughtsmen  copy,  that  would  not  be 
much  praise  for  the  photographer. 

So  far  from  the  photograph  being  a  help  to  the  en- 
graver, it  was  at  first  a  decided  hindrance.  The  block 
turned  black  with  the  nitrate  of  silver ;  and  the  engraver 
did  destroy  the  photograph  and  render  invisible  his  lines 
upon  the  photograph  even  as  he  cut  them.  That  was  in- 
deed workjng  in  tlie  dark.  That  special  difficulty  has 
been  got  over;    but  worse  remains  behind. 

When  Cruikshank  or  Darley  drew  upon  the  wood  — 
sa}'  in  fac-simile,  with  pencil  or  pen-and-ink,  their  lines 
had  some  relation  to  the  size  of  the  block  and  the  sub- 
ject thereon  drawn.  When  the  artist  whose  great  hand 
is  cramped  b\'  so  small  a  space,  dashes  in  his  cartoon 
with  charcoal  or  crayon,  to  be  reduced  fOr  the  engraver, 
all  that  thoughtfully  proportionate  relation  of  the  draw- 
ing to  its  purpose  is  lost  sight  of.  See  the  so  treated 
St.  Gaudens'  "Faith"  in  Scribner  (June,  p.  173).  It  is 
no  longer  a  pen-and-ink  drawing,  but  an  overcrowded, 
foolishly  minute,  muddy  etching.  W^hen  Mary  Hallock 
Foote  makes  a  drawing  directly  on  the  block,  whether 
of  figures  or  landscape,  the  feeling  of  the  drawing,  dear 
impressionists !  is  better  than  any  figure  or  landscape 
reduction  we  could  have  from  her  enlarged  work.  There 
is  an  art  in  drawing  on  wood  (like  that  of  criticism,  not 
given   to  every  one),  a  special  beauty  in  that  which  no 


80  HINTS    ON   WOOD    ENGRAVING 

photograph  can  convey  or  furnish.  We  sliall  not  be 
gainers  when  drawing  on  the  wood  is  a  lost  art,  and 
photography  universally  substituted  in  its  place  :  which 
seems  to  be  the  aim  of  Scrrbiter. 

But  then  "  the  truth  of  photography,"  "  its  absolute 
correctness,"  especially  in  copies  of  pictures.  In  the  first 
place,  it  is  never  correct.  It  alters  and  destroys,  and 
misrepresents.  In  the  next  place,  it  gives,  whether  of 
picture  or  portrait  or  out-door  scene,  details  which  caiz- 
not  be  engraved.  This  in  the  lighter  parts  of  the  sub- 
ject, which  so  lose  breadth,  unless  the  engraver  takes 
the  liberty  of  throwing  out  what  he  considers  unnecessary 
or  injurious  to  his  effect  (in  which  case  what  is  the 
special  value  of  the  photograph?)  while  in  the  darker 
parts,  even  in  the  clearest  of  photographs,  the  details 
are  lost.  With  or  without  the  photograph,  unless  the  en- 
o-raver  is  not  to  be  interpreter  and  translator  into  the 
new  medium,  it  is  his  business  to  use  his  judgment,  and 
neither  to  servilely  obey  the  painter  who  cannot  draw 
or  is  ignorant  of  how  to  render  color  in  black  and  white 
(some  painters  are),  nor  to  servilely  copy  the  photograph 
—  which  never  is  a  faithful  copy  of  a  picture.  The 
photograph  does  not  give  security  to  the  painter;  and  it 
does  degrade  and  deteriorate  the  engraver,  who,  whether 
idealist,  or  realist,  or  impressionist,  should  at  least  make 
use  of  thought,  of  judgment  and  taste.  If  he  does  not, 
or  cannot,  he  is  not  an  artist. 


PHOTOGRAPHY    ON    WOOD  81 

The  very  instance  given  l)v  Scribner  (Jiilv)  of  the 
vahie  of  photography,  given  to  convict  jMr.  Linton  of 
ignorance,  proves  my  position.  ''  Cole's  engraving  of 
Modjeska,  which  he  praises"  —  writes  the  smart  Re- 
viewer—  "was  done  from  a  photograph  o)i  the  blocks 
and  could  not  have  been  so  well  done  in  any  other  wav." 
To  which  dictu?n  of  the  amateur  critic  the  engraver  re- 
plies—  From  a  drawing  it  would  have  been  better  cut 
and  might  have  escaped  the  faults  it  now  has. 

There  are  some  things,  of  the  mechanical  sort,  in 
which  photography  is  of  use.  But  except  as  material 
for  reference,  and  to  save  time  in  mere  hand-work,  the 
less  the  artist  has  to  do  with  it  the  better.  I  speak  as 
an  artist  —  as  draughtsman  and  engraver  :  not  as  an  Art- 
Reviewer. 


FURTHER    HINTS 

GOOD  READER!  having  got  so  far  in  your  learn- 
ing, the  rest  must  depend  upon  yourself.  To  know 
what  is  good  and  what  bad,  and  why  it  is  so,  like  the 
faculty  for  expressing  the  same  intelligibly  (which  is  the 
art  of  the  critic),  is  not  indeed  given  to  every  one.  But 
with  patience  and  diligent  inquir}',  though  you  may  not 
become  a  qualified  Reviewer,  you  mav  yet  obtain  such 
knowledge  as  will  not  only  prevent  you  from  being  im- 
posed upon  by  Reviewers,  but  give  you  an  interest  and 
pleasure  in  engravings  such  as  only  the  student  can 
obtain. 

It  may  help  some  little  toward  this  if  I  string  together 
yet  a  few  hints,  in  addition  to  those  I  have  already 
offered  ;  and  even  some  of  them  it  may  not  harm  to  em- 
phasize by  repetition. 

And  first,  do  not  be  sure  because  an  engraving  pleases 
you  that  it   must  be  a   good  engraving.      A   taking  sub- 

82 


FURTIIEK    HINTS  83 

ject,  well  drawn,  ma}'  have  been  beyond  the  engraver's 
power  to  spoil.  Look  into  it,  and  try  to  find  how^  much 
of  art  is  in  the  cutting  ! 

Recollect,  on  the  other  hand,  that  a  much  inferior  sub- 
ject, of  little  interest  in  itself,  and  even  not  remarkable 
for  the  j^leasantness  or  excellence  of  the  drawing,  may  be 
very  well  engraved. 

If  you  want  to  judge  of  engraving'^  you  must  separate 
in  your   mind   the  engraving  from   the  drawing. 

Still  less  will  3"ou  allow  yourself  to  be  taken  in  bv  the 
prettiness  of  the  draughtsman's  arrangements.  Give 
him  all  the  credit  for  that  I  It  is  his  due.  But  do  not 
suppose  because  of  that  the  engraving  —  the  engraver's 
part — is  either  better  or  worse.  My  hints  are  concern- 
ing engraving :  though  the  draughtsman  must  be  brought 
in  sometimes. 

Do  not  think  that  ever}'  engraving  must  have  both  force 
and  delicacy,  or  that  force  is  better  than  delicacy,  or 
delicacy  better  than  force.  That  depends  upon  the 
subject.  When  you  find  one,  or  both,  in  an  engraving, 
trv  to  see  also  the  means  by  which  they  have  been  ob- 
tained. Not  that  you  may  judge  of  the  "legitimacy" 
of  the  work  (the  end  will  justifv  the  means)  :  but 
that  you  may  learn  whether  the  end  has  been  reached 
designedly  or  by  accident.  Accidental  results  are  not 
meritorious,  and   may  generally  be  doubted. 


84  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

Do  not  be  cai-ried  away  captive  by  the  fineness  or  the 
boldness  of  an  engraving !  Either  quality  is  good  in  the 
right  place.  Excessive  fineness  —  very  minute  work  — 
is  not  necessary  to  constitute  a  Jine  engraving :  using 
the  word  italicized  in  an  artistic  sense,  as  great  or  good. 
The  super-fineness,  or  the  multiplicity  of  lines,  indicates 
no  advance  in  art.  The  artist  will  not  employ  two  lines 
when  one  will  serve  his  purpose  as  well, — or  better. 
Nor  will  he  for  any  consideration  consent  to  unmeaning 
lines. 

On  this  question  of  fineness  I  may  be  allowed  to  quote 
from  my  Atlantic  article.  Though  I  yet  may  be  misun- 
derstood, I  cannot  write  anything  more  to  the  purpose. 

"It  is  altogether  a  inistake  to  suppose  that  a  work 
cannot  be  too  fine,  or  that  fineness  (closeness  and  little- 
ness of  line)  and  refinement  (finish)  are  anything  like 
synonymous  terms.  There  is  such  a  thing  as  propriety  — 
suitability  not  onXy  to  size  but  to  subject — in  the  treat- 
ment of  ah  engraving.  (Fineness  ma}'  be  out  of  charac- 
ter with  the  subjecto)  A  work  may  be  bold  even  to  the 
verge  of  coarseness,  }et  quite  fine  enough  for  its  purpose. 
.  .  .  Also  it  may  be  finished  and  refined,  however  bold  : 
in  which  case  to  call  it  coarse  simply  because  the  lines 
may  be  large  and  wide  apart  would  be  only  misuse  of 
words.  .  .  .  Fineness  as  an  artist's  word  is  not  the  same 
word  as  in  the  proverb  — '  Fine  feathers  make  fine  birds.' 


FURTHER    HINTS  85 

Fine  (minute)  lines  will  not  make  a  fine  (artistic)  engrav- 
ing. .  .  .  An  engraving  is  fine,  that  is  good,  so  far  as  art, 
as  distinguished  from  mechanism,  has  been  employed 
upon  it,  is  visible  in  the  result:  visible,  I  would  say  fur- 
ther, even  to  the  uneducated,  if  not  already  vitiated  by  the 
words  of  misleading  critics.  The  ari  of  ait  engraving 
is  discoverable,  even  by  the  uninitiated,  in  the  intention 
of  the  lines.  You  may  not  have  an  artist's  quickness 
of  perception,  nor  his  maturer  judgment ;  but  if  you  see 
an  engraving  in  which  the  parts,  any  of  them  taken  sep- 
arately, are  unintelligible,  you  will  rightly  supjiose  that 
the  engraver  did  not  know  what  he  was  doing,  or  how 
to  do  it.  .  .  .  Do  not  believe  that  such  work  is  good  for 
anything,  though  you  read  the  most  impartial  and  un- 
bought  recommendations  of  many  a  newspaper.  Art  is 
a  designing  power.  If  you  can  find  no  proof  of  that, 
reject  the  work  as  bad. 

"  Every  line  of  an  engraving  ought  to  have  a  meaning, 
should  be  cut  in  the  block  with  design.  From  a  draw- 
ing you  can  erase  a  false  line  ;  from  a  metal  plate  you 
can  hammer  out  your  faults :  in  wood  there  is  no  such 
easy  alteration.  On  paper  or  canvas  you  can  rub  in  a 
meaningless  background,  a  formless  void,  which  is  all 
you  want;  on  steel  or  copper  you  can  cross  lines  re- 
peatedly so  minutely  that  all  which  can  be  seen  is  as 
vague  as  any  rubbing-in  :    you   cannot  do  this   in  wood. 


86  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

To  cut  SO  finely  as  to  get  only  color  is  next  to  impossi- 
ble, and  so  far  as  it  can  be  done  useless,  for  it  will  not 
print.  It  is  for  this  reason  —  that  every  line  in  wood- 
engraving  bears  witness  for  or  against  you,  that  I  have 
spoken  of  white  line  as  the  true  province  of  engraving- 
on-wood." 

The  engraver  —  further  repeating  myself — "  is  an  artist 
only  so  yar  as  every  line  he  ctcts  has  inte7ition  of  rep-r 
rese7itii7g  sotnethlng.  In  such  work  he  is  an  artist  in 
exactly  the  same  degree  in  which  the  translator  of  poetry 
is  a  poet."  [We  do  not  hear  of  the  imaccountable  dis- 
like of  poets  to  free  translation.]  "  No  literal  transla- 
tion is  artistic.  The  translator  must  be  possessed  by  the 
spirit  of  his  original  before  he  can  speak  in  his  own 
language  what  had  been  said  in  the  other  tongue.  Be- 
tween literality,  never  correct  "  —  mechanical  exactness 
(miscalled  realism)  in  engraving  —  "and  translation, 
which  do  you  prefer? 

"...  A  copper  (or  steel)  engraving  which  the  engraver 
absolutely  draws  with  his  own  lines  —  no  drawing  at  all 
on  the  plate  except  his  own  —  has  the  dignity  of  a  poetic 
translation.  A  wood-engraving  from  a  washed  drawing 
has  the  same  merit,  is  a  translation  of  as  much  if  not 
greater  difficulty,  since  (as  before  shown)  every  line  is 
unalterable.  Copper  (or  steel)  has  its  preeminences  — 
fineness  and  delicacy"  (which  it  is  foolish  waste  of  time 


FURTHER    HINTS 


87 


to  endeavor  to  rival).  "  There  are  brilliant  and  atmos- 
pheric effects  "  (unknown  to  the  Scr  ib  ner  &c\-\oo\),  '-above 
all  a  freshness  and  painter-like  touch  peculiar  to  wood, 
which  on  copper  cannot  be  produced.  Especially  the 
character  of  the  painter  (not  as  shown  in  brush-marks) 
can  be  rendered  in  a  way  not  approachable  by  copper. 
These  are  indications  of  art  in  engraving,  the  results  at 
which  an  artist-engraver  would  aim,-a?«t/  by  which  alone, 
according  to  the  degree  of  his  success,  he  must  take  rank 
a77iong  artists^ 

Out  of  this  the  Nation  critic  has  somehow  evolved  a 
theory,  of  which  he  gives  me  the  credit,  that  '•  an  un- 
touched block  is  the  only  medium  for  the  artist-engraver, 
and  no  one  but  him  ought  to  touch  it,  whether  with 
pencil  or  brush  in  preliminary  laying  out  of  the  work.' 
All  which  is  the  height  of  absurdity,  albeit  it  is  possible 
to  engrave  without  a  drawing,  on  a  plain  block  as  on  a  steel 
plate.  And  "  the  most  ambitious  engravers  we  have  "  — 
the  Sun  says — "do  their  work  as  nearly  as  possible  in 
the  same  way."  Were  this  last  statement  true  it  might 
of  itself  disi)ose  of  the  arguments  in  favor  of  photo- 
graphy—  no  longer  needed  on  the  wood.  However,  the 
information  from  the  Sun,  like  the  theory  of  the  Nation, 
is  erroneous. 

Photography   is  better   than   no  drawing  at  all.       It  is 
better  than  an  incorrect  drawing.     That  is  the  best  you 


50  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

can  say  of  photography :  though  the  assertion  in  Scrib- 
ner  of  the  incompetence  of  American  draughtsmen  were 
really  true. 

Do  not  be  too  exacting  as  regards  distinction  of  ma- 
terial in  an  engraving  of  a  few  inches  square  ;  but  if 
you  cannot  distinguish  water  from  grass,  sky  from  stone 
walls,  calico  from  bronze,  or  a  hair-mat  from  a  philoso- 
pher's cheek,  you  may  be  right  in  doubting  the  engrav- 
er's perception  of  differences ;  the  perception  of  the  ad- 
miring Reviewer  also.  You  have  no  occasion  to  inquire 
further  as  to  whether  the  Reviewer  was  paid  by  the 
newspaper  or  by  the  "  house." 

It  is  quite  certain  that  all  the  approving  notices  of 
magazines  and  other  artistic  work  are  not  written  by 
direct  order  of  the  publishers. 

Also,  you  should  not  take  for  granted  that  objections 
to  a  certain  style  of  work  must  necessarily  be  the  petu- 
lant expressions  of  exasperated  or  disappointed  engrav- 
ers ;  and  you  may  further  admit  that  a  critic,  even  if  he 
has  had  experience  in  engraving,  may  not  be  altogether 
mistaking  in  his  censures,  though  he  cannot  make  his 
reasons  clear  to  Reviewers  who  have  had  no  experience, 
who  know  nothing  of  the  subject  in  dispute,  and  whose 
acquaintance  with  the  art  of  which  that  subject  is  part 
may  be  nil. 

On  one  ground  however  you  may  make   common  cause 


FURTHER    HINTS  89 

with   such   Reviewers,  and  abstain  from  further  informa- 
tion :   in  the  words  of  the  poet  — 

"  Where  ignorance  is  bliss  " 
(even  when  not  paid  for  standing  in  the  Sun) 
"  'Tis  folly  to  be  wise." 


Some  last  words  of  personal  apology  may  not  be  out 
of  place.  Have  I  dealt  too  harshly  or  too  hardly  with 
my  Reviewers?  Not  more  hardly,  I  will  maintain,  than 
the  unqualified  ignorance  in  relation  to  engraving  be- 
trayed by  some  and  the  unhesitating  mendacity  of  others 
as  regards  myself  have  earned,  —  and  required,  were  it 
only  that  the  readers  of  the  anonymous  might  be  on 
their  guard.  Personal  resentment  —  I  have  none.  I 
suppose  these  men  must  write  to  live,  though  I  may 
not  be  sufficiently  impressed  with  the  necessity  of  such 
living. 

Of  those  artists  and  engravers  whose  works  I  have 
"assailed  with  violence  "  or  "  passed  with  contemptuous 
silence "  (for  it  seems  I  am  not  permitted  to  be  right 
either  way)  I  ask  a  brotherly  pardon.  I  have  not  sought 
to  wound  the  tenderest  susceptibility.  If  I  have  "picked 
holes,"  it  has  been  only  in  order  to  sow  some  seeds  of 
truth  ;  if  I  have  hit  any  awkwardly,  it  has  been  in  the 
perhaps  too  great  eagerness  of  an  innocent  desire  to  en- 


90  HINTS    ON    WOOD    ENGRAVING 

force  sound  principles.  There  is  really  no  venom  in  my 
rattle,  no  spite  in  my  most  indignant  and  splenetic  vitu- 
peration. Only  with  "conscience  and  tender  heart" 
(that  is  not  borrowed  from  my  Reviewers)  I  have  said 
what  to  me  seemed  —  and  seems  —  important  to  the  in- 
terest of  Art,  —  which  also  is  the  higher  interest  of 
artists.  Toward  Mr.  Cole  or  Mr.  Evans,  Mr.  Eaton  or 
Mr.  Kelly,  or  any  of  the  unnamed  whose  works  I  have 
canvassed  with  an  artist's  freedom,  I  can  say  with  all 
sincerity  I  have  no  ill-feeling.  Nevertheless  I  had  a 
right  to  criticize  what  challenged  criticism.  I  w-ould 
speak  as  frankly  and  as  harshly  of  the  works  of  my 
dearest  friends.  Could  my  Reviewers,  with  their  hands 
upon  their  hollownesses,  say  as  much,  I  would  forgive  their 
ugliest  blows  and  all  their  offensiveness,  even  as  I  hope 
to  be  forgiven  for  my  own. 

To  Messrs.  Scribner,  much  as  their  name  has  been 
called  in  question,  I  do  not  feel  that  apology  is  needed, 
certainly  not  beyond  what  I  have  elsewhere  been  glad  to 
say.  They  should  be  glad  of  any  plain  speaking.  I  do 
not  imagine  that  my  worst  words  will  injure  them,  or  my 
best  be  of  any  very  beneficial  consequence.  If  they  can 
learn  anything  from  what  I  have  written  and  so  improve 
their  already  very  creditable  and  (notwithstanding  all  mis- 
takes) deservedly  popular  magazine,  so  much  the  better 
for  their  subscribers.     I  do  not  reckon  on  a  considerable 


FURTHER    HINTS 


91 


number  of  copies  to  be  sold  through  me.  Did  I  attach 
such  influence  to  my  writing  I  should  claim  the  publish- 
ers' gratitude  instead  of  an  editor's  ill-temper. 

It  yet  may  be  that  a  few  new  subscribers  will  be  at- 
tracted for  the  sake  of  proving  the  value  of  my  Hints. 
To'  these  and  what  other  public  may  honor  me  with  so 
much  attention,  I  ofler  beforehand  the  expression  of  a 
hope  that  they  may  profit  by  my  instruction.  And  now, 
O  weary  Reader  I  farewell!  My  task  —  not  altogether 
pleasant  —  is  finished;  and  I  have  but  to  sit  down  and 
patiently  await  the  scalping-knives  of  the  Pursuers. 


POSTSCRIPT. 


SINCE  my  work  was  at  press  I  liave  had  a  visit  from 
Mr.  Cole.  Without  revolver !  Nor  did  hard  or  un- 
friendly words  pass  between  us.  I  think  he  was  satisfied 
with  the  welcome  he  received ;  and  for  myself,  I  was 
pleased  to  become  acquainted  with  him,  and  also  with 
some  proofs  of  his  later  work  which  he  brought  for  my 
acceptance.  He  did  not  hold  that  I  had  abused  him 
"  like  an  artistic  pickpocket "  ;  "  was  not  offended  "  at 
my  strictures  in  the  Atlantic;  and  critic  and  criticized 
agreed  in  their  judgments  to  an  extent  that  might  have 
astonished  a  listening  Reviewer. 

What  I  have  written  of  him,  being  honest,  may  yet 
stand.  I  do  not  recall  my  words  ;  but  I  am  glad  to  know 
that  there  is  no  fear  of  his  misunderstanding. 

W.  J.  L. 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara 


'm 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


•1  im 


RET 


h''%<^ 


P 


Series  9482 


